Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth [2018] FCA 1556

Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth [2018] FCA 1556

The respondents (Wyeth) are liable to pay compensation to each claimant (generics and certain suppliers) under the undertakings as to damages because each claimant was adversely affected by the operation of interlocutory injunctions restraining commercial activities (supply and PBS listing of generic venlafaxine products) based on a patent later found invalid. Compensation is to be assessed generally on an opportunity basis (not an all-or-nothing balance of probabilities approach), by reference to the value of lost commercial opportunities discounted according to the probability or possibility of their realization, with quantum calculated in accordance with detailed econometric and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Inquiry/compensation for Wrongly Granted Interlocutory Injunctions Under Undertakings as to Damages—patent Case / Final Judgment After Inquiry Into Compensation Post Appeal on Undertakings as to Damages
Outcome
Compensation ordered in favor of each claimant against Wyeth under the undertaking as to damages for losses caused by the operation of interlocutory injunctions, quantum to be determined per identified probabilities/possibilities and further calculation.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunctions' 'undertakings as to Damages' 'assessment of Compensation' 'remoteness of Damage' 'proof of Loss' 'patent Invalidity']
['intellectual Property' 'patents' 'civil Procedure'] ['interlocutory Injunctions' 'undertakings as to Damages' 'assessment of Compensation' 'remoteness of Damage' 'proof of Loss' 'patent Invalidity']

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

Inquiry/compensation for Wrongly Granted Interlocutory Injunctions Under Undertakings as to Damages—patent Case / Final Judgment After Inquiry Into Compensation Post Appeal on Undertakings as to Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Are claimants entitled to compensation under undertakings as to damages following wrongly granted interlocutory injunctions restraining generic supply pending patent litigation where the patent was subsequently held invalid?' 'On what basis and with what methods should losses (including loss of opportunity) be quantified for generics, suppliers, and others affected by the injunctions?' 'How should legal and evidentiary standards of proof and causation be applied when evaluating hypothetical counterfactual supply, listing on PBS, or contractual supply chains, and what is the correct treatment of possible supervening illegality or copyright infringement?']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents (Wyeth) are liable to pay compensation to each claimant (generics and certain suppliers) under the undertakings as to damages because each claimant was adversely affected by the operation of interlocutory injunctions restraining commercial activities (supply and PBS listing of generic venlafaxine products) based on a patent later found invalid. Compensation is to be assessed generally on an opportunity basis (not an all-or-nothing balance of probabilities approach), by reference to the value of lost commercial opportunities discounted according to the probability or possibility of their realization, with quantum calculated in accordance with detailed econometric and...

Court Disposition

Compensation ordered in favor of each claimant against Wyeth under the undertaking as to damages for losses caused by the operation of interlocutory injunctions, quantum to be determined per identified probabilities/possibilities and further calculation.

Orders

  • ["Until 5.00pm on 26 October 2018, reasons for judgment not to be disclosed beyond parties' legal representatives (confidentiality order)" 'Procedure for further confidentiality claim outlined if sought by parties' 'If no confidentiality claim, reasons to be published after 26 October 2018' 'Directions for further...