Novartis AG v Hospira Pty Limited [2012] FCA 1055

Novartis AG v Hospira Pty Limited [2012] FCA 1055

Applicants established strong prima facie cases of infringement under s 117 of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) of claims in the 283 and 109 patents. Respondent's challenges to validity (novelty and inventive step) did not sufficiently weaken the prima facie case. The balance of convenience and justice, including risk of irreversible statutory price reductions, loss of revenue and brand equity, and difficulties quantifying damages, weighed in favour of granting interlocutory injunctive relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunctions / Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctive relief granted; parties to provide proposed orders and undertakings.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunctions' 'patent Infringement' 'pharmaceutical Patents' 'balance of Convenience' 'statutory Construction']
['intellectual Property' 'patents'] ['interlocutory Injunctions' 'patent Infringement' 'pharmaceutical Patents' 'balance of Convenience' 'statutory Construction']

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

Application for Interlocutory Injunctions / Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether applicants have established a prima facie case of patent infringement' 'Whether relevant patent claims are valid (novelty and inventive step)' 'Whether the balance of convenience and justice favours grant of interlocutory injunctive relief' 'Adequacy of damages instead of interlocutory injunction']

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants established strong prima facie cases of infringement under s 117 of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) of claims in the 283 and 109 patents. Respondent's challenges to validity (novelty and inventive step) did not sufficiently weaken the prima facie case. The balance of convenience and justice, including risk of irreversible statutory price reductions, loss of revenue and brand equity, and difficulties quantifying damages, weighed in favour of granting interlocutory injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctive relief granted; parties to provide proposed orders and undertakings.

Orders

  • ['The parties provide to my Associate by 4.00 pm on 5 October 2012 drafts of the orders and undertakings each proposes, unless the form of relief can be agreed in the meantime.' 'Leave be granted to the parties to approach my Associate to have the matters relisted for further argument, as might be necessary, on that...