Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 200

Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 200

The communications recorded in paragraphs 105, 107 and 108 of Mr Bradford's affidavit are privileged under patent attorney/client privilege and have not been waived. The privilege was not waived merely by giving discovery of related documents, as conduct was not inconsistent with maintenance of confidentiality, except for the information directly disclosed in certain documents. Only the first two sentences of paragraph 106 may be admitted due to waiver; remainder to be excluded.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Cross Claim for Revocation / Interlocutory Determination on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Affidavit redacted to exclude inadmissible privileged material; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['legal Professional Privilege' 'patent Attorney/client Privilege' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'waiver of Privilege']
['intellectual Property' 'evidence'] ['legal Professional Privilege' 'patent Attorney/client Privilege' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'waiver of Privilege']

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

Patent Infringement and Cross Claim for Revocation / Interlocutory Determination on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether communications between patent attorney and client are privileged under s 200 of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) and s 118 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)' 'Scope of advice privilege and whether privilege has been waived through disclosure' "Admissibility of paragraphs 105 to 109 of Mr Bradford's affidavit"]

Ratio Decidendi

The communications recorded in paragraphs 105, 107 and 108 of Mr Bradford's affidavit are privileged under patent attorney/client privilege and have not been waived. The privilege was not waived merely by giving discovery of related documents, as conduct was not inconsistent with maintenance of confidentiality, except for the information directly disclosed in certain documents. Only the first two sentences of paragraph 106 may be admitted due to waiver; remainder to be excluded.

Court Disposition

Affidavit redacted to exclude inadmissible privileged material; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The affidavit of Christopher Bradford sworn 27 November 2012 be redacted to exclude inadmissible parts of paragraphs 105 to 109.' 'Costs be reserved.']