CQMS Pty Ltd v Bradken Resources Pty Limited (No 2) [2016] FCA 1144

CQMS Pty Ltd v Bradken Resources Pty Limited (No 2) [2016] FCA 1144

The respondent, having been successful in the main claim, is entitled to its costs generally; apportionment of costs applies to individual issues raised in the cross-claim, distinguishing between corollaries to infringement and separately abandoned grounds. Indemnity costs are appropriate for expenditures related to evidence presented under misapprehension of expert status.

Parties
First Applicant: CQMS Pty Ltd ACN 122 935 906; Second Applicant: CQMS Razer Pty Ltd ACN 010 402 990; First Respondent: Bradken Resources Pty Limited ACN 098 300 988; Second Respondent: Bradken Limited ACN 108 693 009; Cross Claimant: Bradken Resources Pty Limited ACN 098 300 988; Second Cross Claimant: Bradken Limited ACN 108 693 009; Cross Respondent: CQMS Pty Ltd ACN 122 935 906; Second Cross Respondent: CQMS Razer Pty Ltd ACN 010 402 990
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial – Reasons for Judgment and Orders on Costs
Outcome
Respondent's product found not to infringe; costs awarded to respondent except where specified; various orders concerning expert evidence costs and cross-claim issues.
Legal Topics
Patents, Practice and Procedure, Costs
Intellectual Property Patents Practice and Procedure Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CQMS Pty Ltd ACN 122 935 906

First Applicant

CQMS Razer Pty Ltd ACN 010 402 990

Second Applicant

Bradken Resources Pty Limited ACN 098 300 988

First Respondent

Bradken Limited ACN 108 693 009

Second Respondent

Bradken Resources Pty Limited ACN 098 300 988

Cross Claimant

Bradken Limited ACN 108 693 009

Second Cross Claimant

CQMS Pty Ltd ACN 122 935 906

Cross Respondent

CQMS Razer Pty Ltd ACN 010 402 990

Second Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial – Reasons for Judgment and Orders on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Form of orders where respondent's product found not to infringe patent
  2. 2 Appropriate costs orders after trial, including costs of expert evidence
  3. 3 Relief concerning unjustified threats by applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent, having been successful in the main claim, is entitled to its costs generally; apportionment of costs applies to individual issues raised in the cross-claim, distinguishing between corollaries to infringement and separately abandoned grounds. Indemnity costs are appropriate for expenditures related to evidence presented under misapprehension of expert status.

Court Disposition

Respondent's product found not to infringe; costs awarded to respondent except where specified; various orders concerning expert evidence costs and cross-claim issues.

Orders

  • Orders pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 of applicant's short minutes, with schedule identifying relevant respondent's products.
  • Certification pursuant to s 19 (with amendment).