The University of Western Australia v Gray (No 16) [2007] FCA 843

The University of Western Australia v Gray (No 16) [2007] FCA 843

The Heartlink documents concerned the resolution of a particular dispute about ownership of intellectual property and did not support general inferences about the University's tendency or capacity in relation to commercialisation of intellectual property. To the extent they were tendency evidence under s 97, they lacked significant probative value; to the extent they went to capacity, their probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger that they might cause or result in undue waste of time. The tender was therefore refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence / Tender of Heartlink Documents During Proceedings
Outcome
Tender refused
Legal Topics
['tendency Evidence' 'notice Requirement' 'probative Value' 'case Management' 'commercialisation of Patentable Inventions']
['evidence' 'intellectual Property'] ['tendency Evidence' 'notice Requirement' 'probative Value' 'case Management' 'commercialisation of Patentable Inventions']

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

Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence / Tender of Heartlink Documents During Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether documents concerning dealings between the University of Western Australia, Dr Hans Stampfer, Heartlink Diagnostics Pty Ltd and Heartlink Limited were admissible as evidence of a tendency of the University not to commercialise patentable inventions disclosed by its staff.' "Whether the documents were admissible as evidence of the University's lack of capacity to commercialise inventions." 'Whether any probative value of the documents was outweighed by the danger that their admission might cause or result in undue waste of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Heartlink documents concerned the resolution of a particular dispute about ownership of intellectual property and did not support general inferences about the University's tendency or capacity in relation to commercialisation of intellectual property. To the extent they were tendency evidence under s 97, they lacked significant probative value; to the extent they went to capacity, their probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger that they might cause or result in undue waste of time. The tender was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Tender refused

Orders

  • ['The tender of the Heartlink documents is refused.']