Archives for: ‘Health & pharmaceuticals’

Productivity Commission recommends extensive changes to Australian IP – including fair use, circumventing geoblocks, abolishing business method and software patents and more!

Today, the Productivity Commission has released its draft report into Australia’s intellectual property arrangements. IP Whiteboard readers may recall that last year, the Federal Government asked the Productivity Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of Australia’s intellectual property system (see our previous post here). At 600 pages, the draft report is certainly comprehensive! We have published an alert summarising the …

Read More
Partner:

Same same but different? Federal Court finds Reckitt Benckiser’s/Nurofen’s marketing of the ‘specific pain relief’ range constitutes misleading and deceptive conduct

Last week Justice Edelman delivered judgment in the Federal Court, finding that Reckitt Benckiser (Australia)’s packaging and website descriptions of the Nurofen ‘Specific Pain Range’ constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (‘ACL’). Reckitt Benckiser was found to have represented that the four products in the Nurofen Specific Pain Range were each specifically formulated …

Read More

MUSASHI v A-SASHI – healthy competition?

The appeal from the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in Christian v Société Des Produits Nestlé SA (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 153 concerning infringement of Nestlé’s MUSASHI marks raises interesting questions regarding the nature and scope of relief for trade mark infringement.

Read More
Partner:

Productivity Commission releases roadmap for IP review and calls for submissions

Last week, the Productivity Commission released the Issues Paper in accordance with its comprehensive review of Australia’s IP regime (Inquiry). In a previous post, we outlined the scope of the Inquiry and the key areas of the IP regime which the Federal Government had directed the Commission to examine and report on by August 2016. The Issues Paper sets out …

Read More
Partner:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership’s IP provisions: Biologics and biosimilars, copyright and privacy

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was concluded on 5 October 2015, after 8 years of negotiations. Its twelve signatories, who together account for 40% of world GDP, are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States and Vietnam. The details of the agreement have yet to be released, but a number of drafts of the agreement …

Read More

High Court re-invents the test for patentable subject matter and finds the patent for the isolated breast cancer gene invalid

The High Court has handed down a significant decision finding that patent claims for isolated gene sequences, indicative of a predisposition to breast cancer, are not patentable subject matter. The decision can be found here (a one page summary has also been published by the High Court). The decision overturns the unanimous decision of the Full Federal Court (which sat …

Read More
Partner:

Clarisonic v PuraSonic – the allure of miraculous transformational product claims

The Federal Court of Australia has granted preliminary discovery in L’Oréal Australia Pty Ltd v BrandPoint Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 978 with respect to product claims made in relation to the PuraSonic facial cleansing brush. Immortalised by Justice Beach as “a product marketed to the fairer sex with the allure of its miraculous transformational properties”, the application concerned representations made in …

Read More
Partner:

High Court States the Obvious: AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Pty Ltd Appeal Decided

by Kim O’Connell, Suzy Madar and James Ellsmore In a widely anticipated decision, the High Court has upheld a decision of the Full Federal Court that AstraZeneca’s patent relating to low dosages of rosuvastatin is invalid for want of inventive step. Rosuvastatin is used in the treatment of high cholesterol and is marketed by AstraZeneca as Crestor. The decision will …

Read More

Update: Otsuka Successful in Stay Application: Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd v Generic Health Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 848

Further to our post of 7 July 2015, the proceedings brought by Otsuka and Bristol Myers Squibb (the “exclusive licensee” of Otsuka’s patents for aripiprazole) against Generic Health have taken another turn. Justice Nicholas delivered judgment on Friday 14 August in the interlocutory application sought by Otsuka and BMS. The orders and reasons were published on Tuesday 18 August. The …

Read More
Partner:

Page 1 of 1312345»10...Last »