We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 11-20 of 481

Could the Australian courts ‘compel’ those who prescribe and dispense medicines to help big pharma fight generics?

  • Watermark Patent & Trade Marks Attorneys
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 12 2015

A recent UK court ruling has broken new ground in ordering an official health body to issue guidelines on prescribing a generic drug. Could the same

Victorian Supreme Court finds royalties still payable after patents expire

  • Davies Collison Cave
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 10 2015

The Victorian Supreme Court has held that a party who purchased technology that was the subject of patent applications at the time of the transaction

How inevitable must a result be to destroy novelty? Is inevitability relevant to obviousness? When is a patent licence “exclusive”?

  • Davies Collison Cave
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 10 2015

These questions were recently considered by the Full Federal Court (Besanko, Jagot and Nicholas JJ) in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Otsuka

The agony of anticipation: when will a prior disclosure mean a patent is invalid?

  • Clayton Utz
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 5 2015

Inevitability is often associated with death and taxes. Something is "inevitable" only when there can be no other outcome. In a recent decision, the

ACCC v Pfizer some guidance to pharmaceutical companies on navigating competition risk

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 3 2015

The Federal Court of Australia has recently dismissed the ACCC’s case against pharmaceutical company Pfizer. The ACCC alleged that Pfizer had misused

ACCC v Pfizer and the future of section 46

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 2 2015

The Federal Court has again found against the ACCC in a misuse of market power case, this time involving allegations that Pfizer abused its incumbent

The right to exploit a patent is a “single indivisible right” - Full Federal Court confirms

  • Corrs Chambers Westgarth
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 2 2015

In February last year we reported on a decision of Justice Yates of the Federal Court in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v Apotex Pty Ltd (No 5). Our

Pfizer case shows protecting your own position isn't anti-competitive

  • Clayton Utz
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 2 2015

Commercial strategies and practices used by Pfizer to counter the expected loss of revenue caused by the expiry of its patent over Lipitor, its

ACCC v Pfizer judgment summary and ramifications

  • Piper Alderman
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 27 2015

On 25 February 2015, Justice Flick of the Federal Court of Australia ruled in favour of Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd (Pfizer), dismissing the Australian

Parachuting off the patent cliff

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 26 2015

Yesterday the Federal court handed down its decision in ACCC v Pfizer. The facts of the case reflect the very significant power of IP rights and the