You’re probably already lacing up your running shoes at the very thought of the mention of the International Patent Classification (IPC), but please stick around; I promise this will be almost painless. If you’re like me, your introduction to the IPC was a seemingly random string of letters and numbers rolling off someone’s tongue.
Welcome to Shelston’s wrap-up of the most notable patent decisions in Australia and New Zealand delivered during 2019. It was a busy year for patent jurisprudence with some interesting themes emerging – in particular, it has been a banner year for decisions on the “manner of manufacture” requirement for patentable subject matter. Read our
Lamont v Malishus & Ors (No.4)  FCCA 3206 On 14 November 2019, Manousaridis J of the Federal Circuit Court handed down his decision in the trade mark dispute over use of the name “MALISHUS”. The Court found infringement of MALISHUS trade mark registrations through use of that word in domain names and on
MS Marketing Inc. v EZ Imports Pty Ltd  ATMO 159 (8 November 2019) The Issue Competing companies separately engaged the services of the same Chinese contract manufacturer to produce a range of electric wheelchairs, mobility scooters and associated parts and accessories. EZ Imports Pty Ltd (“EZ”) sought to register a trade mark in
Welcome to Shelston IP’s round up of Australian trade mark cases for 2019. While there were plenty of cases in 2019, we have selected a few which we think are interesting and provide an indication of the types of issues dealt with by the Courts throughout the year. Please click here for a quick snapshot of each case followed by
Australia’s second-tier “innovation patent” – rumours of its demise have (unfortunately, not) been greatly exaggerated. The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 2 and Other Measures) Bill 2019 has now passed with a clear majority through both houses of Australia’s Federal Parliament. The headline act of the new legislation is that