Law v Razer Industries Pty Limited [2010] FCA 1058 (29 September 2010)
Infringement – infringement commenced during period when patent had ceased – whether there is a causal relationship between temporary ceasing of the patent and respondent's allegedly infringing activities – whether respondent can obtain a licence from Commissioner of Patents pursuant to s 223(9) of the Patents Act 1990 – whether respondent entitled to a stay of orders for infringement pending determination of licence application – whether patentee entitled to restraining order preventing respondent from infringement pending determination of licence application
We noted at the time that we expected to hear more of this dispute, since there are related infringement proceedings ongoing, and apparently various other parties involved.
This decision, issued by Justice Bennett in the Federal Court of Australia, relates to the infringement proceedings, which were commenced by Law on 5 March 2010. Razer sought a stay of the proceedings, pending the outcome of the Patent Office decision on its application for a licence, on the basis that the infringement question will be moot if a licence is granted, while Law sought an order restraining Razer from infringing the patent during the same period.
Infringement – infringement commenced during period when patent had ceased – whether there is a causal relationship between temporary ceasing of the patent and respondent's allegedly infringing activities – whether respondent can obtain a licence from Commissioner of Patents pursuant to s 223(9) of the Patents Act 1990 – whether respondent entitled to a stay of orders for infringement pending determination of licence application – whether patentee entitled to restraining order preventing respondent from infringement pending determination of licence application
 |
| Cause-and-effect necessary for grant of a license under s223(9) |
BACKGROUND
Back in August we reported on a dispute between Razer Industries Pty Ltd ("Razer") and Robert R. Law ("Law") over Law's patent relating to a scraper blade arrangement for a conveyor belt cleaner ("the patent"). In particular, we reviewed a Patent Office decision in which the Commissioner's Delegate denied Razer's request to dismiss an opposition by Law to an application by Razer for what we dubbed a "licence to infringe".
This decision, issued by Justice Bennett in the Federal Court of Australia, relates to the infringement proceedings, which were commenced by Law on 5 March 2010. Razer sought a stay of the proceedings, pending the outcome of the Patent Office decision on its application for a licence, on the basis that the infringement question will be moot if a licence is granted, while Law sought an order restraining Razer from infringing the patent during the same period.
