Online book retailer Booktopia has admitted it scrapped a term requiring two days’ notice of damaged or incorrect books, but rejects claims by the ACCC that the policy resulted in a systematic refusal to refund customers.
Plumbing company Repipe has asked the High Court to take up its case centred on the controversial issue of patent eligibility for computer-implemented inventions, seeking to overturn a judgment it argues sets a new and impermissible test.
Apple has fired back in a lawsuit alleging its iPhone and iPad devices equipped with Touch ID and Face ID technology infringe patents held by an Australian non-practicing entity, hitting the company with its own case claiming the patents are invalid.
Burger giant Hungry Jack’s has lost its bid to have McDonald’s hand over test results showing the âpre-cookedâ weight of its Big Mac beef patties, with a judge finding they were not relevant to whether the rivalâs Big Jack burger had 25 per cent âmore Aussie beefâ.
Tech company Vehicle Management Systems has come up short in its third attempt to block competitor SARB Management Group’s patent application for a magnetic parking overstay detector, with the Full Court rejecting claims that VMS’ managing director should have been listed as the device’s inventor.
A judge was “mistaken” to find that AFT Pharmaceuticals’ ads for its painkiller Maxigesic were misleading, with the Full Federal Court ruling there was an adequate scientific foundation for the ads’ claims that the drug provided faster, better pain relief than paracetamol and ibuprofen alone.
Five years into a preliminary discovery application for a potential patent infringement lawsuit over a biosimilar of its Enbrel medication, Pfizer has partially succeeded in obtaining further documents from Samsung Bioepis.
Drug company Ono Pharmaceutical has faced tough questioning by an appeals court in a fight with IP Australia over a decision that secured it a patent extension for its cancer immunotherapy drug Opdivo.
Car repair giant AMA Group has so far spent $737,000 in professional fees investigating whistleblower claims and taking former boss Andrew Hopkins to court for allegedly defrauding the company.
In a recent decision, the Full Federal Court confirmed that a trade mark owner who merely authorises use of its trade mark cannot be subject to liability for direct trade mark infringement under section 120(1) of the Trade Marks Act, writes Shelston IP’s Kathy Mytton and Sean McManis.