Chamberlain Group, Inc v Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd [2017] FCA 1472

Chamberlain Group, Inc v Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd [2017] FCA 1472

The applicants satisfied the requirements of r 10.43(4) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth): the Court has jurisdiction, the proceeding is within the scope of r 10.42, and the applicants have established a prima facie case for relief for direct and authorised patent infringement. Service outside Australia is therefore permitted.

Parties
First Applicant: The Chamberlain Group, Inc; Second Applicant: Chamberlain Australia Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd; Second Respondent: Autoga Co Ltd; Third Respondent: Codeezy Pty Ltd; Fourth Respondent: National Garage Remotes and Openers Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement Application for Leave to Serve Originating Application Outside Australia / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Serve Outside Jurisdiction
Outcome
Leave granted to serve originating application outside Australia on the first respondent.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Service Outside Jurisdiction, Prima Facie Case
Intellectual Property Practice and Procedure Patent Infringement Service Outside Jurisdiction Prima Facie Case

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Chamberlain Group, Inc

First Applicant

Chamberlain Australia Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd

First Respondent

Autoga Co Ltd

Second Respondent

Codeezy Pty Ltd

Third Respondent

National Garage Remotes and Openers Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement Application for Leave to Serve Originating Application Outside Australia / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Serve Outside Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the proceeding is of a kind mentioned in r 10.42 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie case for relief against the first respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants satisfied the requirements of r 10.43(4) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth): the Court has jurisdiction, the proceeding is within the scope of r 10.42, and the applicants have established a prima facie case for relief for direct and authorised patent infringement. Service outside Australia is therefore permitted.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to serve originating application outside Australia on the first respondent.

Orders

  • Pursuant to r 10.43 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), leave be granted to the applicants to serve the originating application on the first respondent in the People's Republic of China in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial...