Neurizon Pty Limited v Jupiters Limited [2003] FCA 950

Neurizon Pty Limited v Jupiters Limited [2003] FCA 950

Given Mr Steven Johnson’s unique role as inventor and representative for the applicant, withholding access to technical documents (other than the source code document 36) would likely prejudice the applicant’s conduct of the case. A limited disclosure subject to undertakings appropriately balances both parties’ interests.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Motion Regarding Discovery/confidentiality / Interlocutory Application/orders for Discovery
Outcome
Limited inspection of certain confidential documents allowed to the applicant’s inventor/representative and appointed experts under specific undertakings; confidentiality otherwise protected.
Legal Topics
['discovery' 'confidentiality' 'patent Infringement']
['civil Procedure'] ['discovery' 'confidentiality' 'patent Infringement']

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

Motion Regarding Discovery/confidentiality / Interlocutory Application/orders for Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether confidential technical documents relating to the respondents' Cougar System should be disclosed to the applicant or its associated persons, specifically Mr Steven Johnson, in the context of a patent infringement action."]

Ratio Decidendi

Given Mr Steven Johnson’s unique role as inventor and representative for the applicant, withholding access to technical documents (other than the source code document 36) would likely prejudice the applicant’s conduct of the case. A limited disclosure subject to undertakings appropriately balances both parties’ interests.

Court Disposition

Limited inspection of certain confidential documents allowed to the applicant’s inventor/representative and appointed experts under specific undertakings; confidentiality otherwise protected.

Orders

  • ['Inspection of documents numbered 23, 24, 27, 29-31, 34 and 35 (but not 36) to be made available to Mr Steven Johnson, subject to oral and written undertakings per Annexure D to his affidavit.' 'Each of those documents, together with document 36, to be available to independent expert(s) appointed by the applicant,...