Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd & Ors v Crawshaw, Richard & Ors Crawshaw, Richard & Ors v Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 758

Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd & Ors v Crawshaw, Richard & Ors Crawshaw, Richard & Ors v Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 758

Although respondents/cross-claimants succeeded in the main outcome (dismissal and revocation), the unnecessary extension of the trial from unsuccessful grounds justified an order that applicants pay only one half of respondents'/cross-claimants' costs, taxed as one set of costs. Costs of mediation, certain interlocutory applications and specific disbursements were excluded or left for the taxing officer.

Parties
Applicant/cross Respondent: Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd ACN 009 235 965; Applicant/cross Respondent: Stanley John Jacek; Applicant/cross Respondent: Joan Eileen Jacek; Respondent/cross Claimant: Richard Crawshaw; Respondent/cross Claimant: Graham Francis Atkinson; Respondent/cross Claimant: Catherine Mary Atkinson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 1996
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination (following Judgment on Patent Revocation and Infringement) / Post Trial; Costs Orders
Outcome
Applicants to pay one half of the respondents/cross-claimants' costs of the application and cross-claim, taxed as one set of costs.
Legal Topics
Patents, Costs Orders, Mediation Costs, Patent Revocation
Intellectual Property Litigation Procedure Patents Costs Orders Mediation Costs Patent Revocation

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd ACN 009 235 965

Applicant/cross Respondent

Stanley John Jacek

Applicant/cross Respondent

Joan Eileen Jacek

Applicant/cross Respondent

Richard Crawshaw

Respondent/cross Claimant

Graham Francis Atkinson

Respondent/cross Claimant

Catherine Mary Atkinson

Respondent/cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Costs Determination (following Judgment on Patent Revocation and Infringement) / Post Trial; Costs Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should follow the event after partial success of the respondents/cross-claimants
  2. 2 Whether costs of mediation should be included in the costs of litigation
  3. 3 Appropriate apportionment of costs where multiple grounds failed

Ratio Decidendi

Although respondents/cross-claimants succeeded in the main outcome (dismissal and revocation), the unnecessary extension of the trial from unsuccessful grounds justified an order that applicants pay only one half of respondents'/cross-claimants' costs, taxed as one set of costs. Costs of mediation, certain interlocutory applications and specific disbursements were excluded or left for the taxing officer.

Court Disposition

Applicants to pay one half of the respondents/cross-claimants' costs of the application and cross-claim, taxed as one set of costs.

Orders

  • The applicants pay one half of the respondents/cross-claimants' costs of the application and cross-claim, taxed as one set of costs.