Author: Melissa Marcus

Patents – extension of term – which ARTG registration may be relied on

Patents – method of diagnosis – manner of manufacture – sufficiency – fair basis – infringement

Use of the phrases “Love where you live?” and “You love where you live” held not to constitute use of those phrases as a trade mark for the purposes of s 120.

Copyright in plan of subdivision – interlocutory injunction application – balance of convenience weighted against grant of injunction

Patents – transfer of proceedings to Federal Court – overlap in subject matter – risk of inconsistent findings

Patents – amendment to overcome manner of manufacture objection – whether possible to overcome s 102 – whether the principle of finality should prevent iterative amendment applications

Trade Marks – Infringement – Interlocutory Injunction – Serious issue to be tried – balance of convenience – application granted.

Trade marks – appeal from judgment dismissing trade mark infringement claim – inherently adapted to distinguish – deceptive similarity

Consumer law – orders for relief – declarations – injunction granted – damages. 

Costs – apportionment of costs

Copyright – artistic works – work of “artistic craftsmanship” – innocent infringement – additional damages – Passing off and ACL misleading or deceptive conduct claims – accessorial liability

Practice and procedure – costs – costs of interlocutory applications to amend patent application

Patents – appeal on opposition to grant – pre-“Raising the Bar” – novelty – inventive step – utility

Patents Act– infringement and validity – variable speed limit signs – whether method or product claims – whether functional limitations were to capabilities or had to be present at all times – Crown use defence– innocent infringement– prior use defence– lapsed patent defence – lack of novelty (and section 24) and inventive step

Trade marks – extension of protection in Australia to IRDA for trade mark MONSTER STRIKE in classes 9 and 41 – appeal from decision of Registrar – reputation of appellant’s marks including M icon and MONSTER ENERGY – whether reliance on s 42(b) and ss 18 and 29 of the ACL for opposition adds anything to reliance on s 60