QPSX Limited v Ericsson Australia Ltd (No 5) [2007] FCA 244

QPSX Limited v Ericsson Australia Ltd (No 5) [2007] FCA 244

The particulars did not disclose an intelligible basis for describing the relevant technology or standards as "integral" or "fundamental"; those evaluative words were embarrassing and were struck out, while the balance of the paragraphs could remain. The applicants were not entitled to a general licence to disclose the Ericsson parties' discovered documents to IMF merely because IMF had an interest under the funding agreement; the implied undertaking, confidentiality and privacy concerns, the limited role of the funder and the absence of specificity as to the documents and purpose justified refusal of the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Civil Proceedings Concerning Breach of a Licensing Agreement With Respect to Patent Rights in Telecommunications Technology and Claims for Misleading or Deceptive Conduct / Decision After Case Management Conference on Sufficiency of Particulars and Proposed Disclosure of Discovered Documents to a Litigation Funder
Outcome
Application partly successful on the Ericsson parties' objections to particulars; applicants' application for liberty to disclose discovered documents to IMF (Australia) Ltd refused.
Legal Topics
['discovery of Documents' 'implied Undertaking' 'litigation Funding' 'pleadings' 'particulars' 'embarrassing Pleading' 'strike Out']
['civil Procedure' 'intellectual Property' 'contract' 'consumer Protection'] ['discovery of Documents' 'implied Undertaking' 'litigation Funding' 'pleadings' 'particulars' 'embarrassing Pleading' 'strike Out']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Civil Proceedings Concerning Breach of a Licensing Agreement With Respect to Patent Rights in Telecommunications Technology and Claims for Misleading or Deceptive Conduct / Decision After Case Management Conference on Sufficiency of Particulars and Proposed Disclosure of Discovered Documents to a Litigation Funder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the particulars supplied by the applicants sufficiently supported the use of the words "integral" and "fundamental" in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the further amended statement of claim.' "Whether documents discovered by the Ericsson parties to the applicants should be made available to the applicants' litigation funder, IMF (Australia) Ltd, for inspection notwithstanding the implied undertaking restricting use of discovered documents."]

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars did not disclose an intelligible basis for describing the relevant technology or standards as "integral" or "fundamental"; those evaluative words were embarrassing and were struck out, while the balance of the paragraphs could remain. The applicants were not entitled to a general licence to disclose the Ericsson parties' discovered documents to IMF merely because IMF had an interest under the funding agreement; the implied undertaking, confidentiality and privacy concerns, the limited role of the funder and the absence of specificity as to the documents and purpose justified refusal of the application.

Court Disposition

Application partly successful on the Ericsson parties' objections to particulars; applicants' application for liberty to disclose discovered documents to IMF (Australia) Ltd refused.

Orders

  • ['The word "integral" in line 2 of [10] of the further amended statement of claim and the word "integral" in line 4 of that paragraph are struck out.' 'The word "fundamental" in line 3 of [11] of the further amended statement of claim is struck out.' "The applicants' application for liberty to disclose documents...