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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 1,499

Omnibus claims: Back to business as usual
  • Minter Ellison
  • Australia
  • July 19 2016

The Full Federal Court has recently handed down its decision in the appeal by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) against the earlier finding by Justice Rares


Omnibus claims confined to essential features
  • Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick
  • Australia
  • July 5 2016

Omnibus claims are now effectively prohibited following the Raising the Bar amendments, however a great many patents including such claims have been


Orica’s blasting method patentable despite Dyno Nobel’s determined opposition
  • Wrays
  • Australia
  • June 28 2016

A recent decision of the Commissioner of Patents has held that a blasting method used in open cut mining (most commonly for coal) that combines a


Indications for use not sufficient to satisfy Australian patent term extension criteria
  • Baldwins
  • Australia
  • June 27 2016

Patents normally have a maximum term of 20 years from their filing date. However, IP Australia may extend a patent’s term beyond 20 years if it


Software patents in Australia: where to from here?
  • Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick
  • Australia
  • June 21 2016

In May 2016, The High Court of Australia dismissed an application for special leave to appeal the RPL Central decision of the Full Court of the


Full Court looks into Best Method requirements
  • Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick
  • Australia
  • June 21 2016

Ever since its introduction into the 1952 Patents Act, there has been a statutory requirement for an Australian complete patent specification to


Gene Patentability - Global View
  • Reinhold Cohn Group
  • Australia, European Union, Israel, Japan, USA
  • June 21 2016

In recent years, the subject of patent-eligibility of gene sequences has commanded significant attention around the globe although different


Full Court shines a light on claim construction
  • Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick
  • Australia
  • June 21 2016

It is a well-established principle of claim construction that it is not permissible to vary or qualify the plain and unambiguous meaning of the claim


Court finds claims lack utility for not satisfying a ‘composite promise’ in a patent specification
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • June 10 2016

In the recent Federal Court decision, Ronneby Road Pty Ltd v ESCO Corporation 2016 FCA 588 (the decision), Justice Jessup found all the claims of


Commonwealth of Australia v Sanofi: The Full Federal Court's decision
  • Clayton Utz
  • Australia
  • June 9 2016

The Full Federal Court held that the Therapeutic Goods Act does not curtail the right of any person (including the Commonwealth) to recover on the