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: 11-20 of 1,459

How do the laws of disclosure and support affect drafting patent specifications?
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • May 6 2016

The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (the RTB Act) commenced 3 years ago, and with the passage of the legislation came


Hopes dashed - High Court of Australia rejects leave to appeal
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • May 6 2016

As discussed here, there was some optimism that the High Court of Australia (HCA) would grant leave to appeal to a patent applicant who earlier had a


RPL Central: High Court Refuses special leave
  • Freehills Patent Attorneys
  • Australia
  • May 6 2016

The RPL Central case has been working its way through the Australian Courts since 2013. The case concerns the subject matter eligibility of a


First test for new ‘Disclosure’ and ‘Support’ standards points the way to the future of patent specifications in Australia
  • Fisher Adams Kelly Callinans
  • Australia
  • May 4 2016

In patent regimes around the world, the conferring of exclusive legal rights to an invention has long been part of a reciprocal exchange of benefits


Say It Isn’t So: Incorporations by Reference and Priority Claims
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • May 3 2016

For priority claim purposes, the invention in a divisional application need only be disclosed, rather than be described, in the priority application


Patentee ‘caned’ for use of the phrase ‘It is found’ in its patent specification
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • April 27 2016

Australian Courts have repeatedly rejected the notion that what the applicant says during prosecution can be held against the patentee during later


Australian Patent Office releases new Guidelines for Computer Related Inventions
  • Spruson & Ferguson
  • Australia
  • April 22 2016

On 1 February 2016, the Australian Patent Office released new guidelines for assessing whether computer-related inventions relate to patentable


Software Patents in Australia: Hope in a High Court Appeal
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • April 12 2016

Recently, we posted some commentary on a recent decision (the RPL decision) on software patents by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia


Toward a new inventiveness requirement: The RPL Central decision
  • FB Rice
  • Australia
  • April 12 2016

As discussed in our related post, the Full Court of the Federal Court has held that computer-implemented business methods are patentable in Australia


Disclose the best method of performing your invention or face the prospect of patent revocation
  • Shelston IP Pty Ltd
  • Australia
  • March 31 2016

The relevant decision, Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Pty Ltd 2016 FCAFC 27 (8 March 2016), considered a patent in the name of Les Laboratoires