GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No.2) Limited v Apotex Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1398
The applicants have a strong prima facie case on infringement, and no ground of patent invalidity advanced by the respondents amounts to a strong prima facie case. The balance of convenience favours maintaining the current restraints (undertakings or their equivalent as injunctions) due to the applicants' established market position, threat of significant market loss, and difficulties in quantification of harm. The applications to be released from undertakings are therefore dismissed.
- Parties
- First Applicant/cross Respondent: GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No.2) Limited; Second Applicant/cross Respondent: GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 100 162 481); Respondent/cross Claimant: Apotex Pty Ltd (ACN 096 916 148); Respondent/cross Claimant: Generic Partners Pty Ltd (ACN 132 833 777)
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 December 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Interlocutory Application in Patent Infringement Action / Application for Release From Undertakings/interlocutory Injunctions
- Outcome
- Applications for release from undertakings/interlocutory relief dismissed; undertakings/constraints maintained
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Practice and Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No.2) Limited
First Applicant/cross Respondent
GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 100 162 481)
Second Applicant/cross Respondent
Apotex Pty Ltd (ACN 096 916 148)
Respondent/cross Claimant
Generic Partners Pty Ltd (ACN 132 833 777)
Respondent/cross Claimant
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Patent Infringement Action / Application for Release From Undertakings/interlocutory Injunctions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether applicants should be released from undertakings restraining supply of generic products alleged to infringe patent
- 2 Whether interlocutory injunctions restraining respondents should remain pending trial
- 3 Strength of prima facie case for infringement and invalidity grounds
Ratio Decidendi
The applicants have a strong prima facie case on infringement, and no ground of patent invalidity advanced by the respondents amounts to a strong prima facie case. The balance of convenience favours maintaining the current restraints (undertakings or their equivalent as injunctions) due to the applicants' established market position, threat of significant market loss, and difficulties in quantification of harm. The applications to be released from undertakings are therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
Applications for release from undertakings/interlocutory relief dismissed; undertakings/constraints maintained
Orders
- Respondent's interlocutory applications dated 5 December 2014 in both proceedings be dismissed.
- The existing undertakings restraining supply of the relevant products remain in place with minor variations to the text of the undertakings as set out in the orders.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment