Sealed Air Australia Pty Limited v Aus-Lid Enterprises Pty Ltd  FCA 29 (24 January 2020) Judge: Kenny J The Federal Court of Australia awards almost $3m in damages to the exclusive sublicensee under a patent licensing agreement. The patent owner (licensor) was ordered to pay $1.32m for granting another licence over the patent in
TGA transparency reforms (part 1): Notification of generic and biosimilar medicines to impact pharmaceutical patent disputes in Australia
Regulatory changes recently approved by the Australian Government are likely to impact the way in which pharmaceutical patent litigation is conducted in Australia. The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is currently seeking feedback on options for implementing the proposed Prescription Medicines Transparency Measures by 9 June 2020. The reforms are directed at: 1. Early publication
Dr August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel v Combe International Ltd  FCA 39 (3 February 2020) On 3 February 2020, Dr August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (Dr Wolff) successfully appealed against a decision by the Registrar of Trade Marks, which refused registration of its VAGISAN trademark. Background The VAGISAN trade
Australia The Australian Trade Marks Office’s operations have been largely unaffected by the coronavirus outbreak. Processing and examination timeframes have not been significantly impacted, and the day-to-day operations of the Office remain, for the most part, unchanged. The Australian Office has very recently implemented a process for granting free three months extensions of time in
For those of you managing international trade marks, you may have noticed that in the last few months the Australian Office has begun including the following sentence with their Statements of Grant of Protection: Please note that as required under the Australian Trade Mark Regulations 1995 you are required to notify the Registrar, in
The relatively new “bad faith” (section 62A) ground of opposition can be a strong basis for action against misappropriation of a trade mark owners’ goodwill, where the more commonly used grounds of deceptive similarity with an earlier mark (section 44) and likelihood of confusion due to reputation in an earlier mark (section 60) would fail.