Purex Corporation Ltd v Vanguard Trading Co [1965] HCA 10

Purex Corporation Ltd v Vanguard Trading Co [1965] HCA 10

The plaintiff is proved to be a corporation entitled to the patent, and the defendants' sale of 'Desista' tablets during the relevant period constituted infringement of the plaintiff's patent rights.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
['patent Infringement' 'corporate Existence' 'registration of Assignment' 'remedies for Infringement']
['intellectual Property'] ['patent Infringement' 'corporate Existence' 'registration of Assignment' 'remedies for Infringement']

Source-derived case record

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

Civil / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff exists as a corporation and is entitled to sue as proprietor of the patent' "Whether the defendants infringed the plaintiff's patent"]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is proved to be a corporation entitled to the patent, and the defendants' sale of 'Desista' tablets during the relevant period constituted infringement of the plaintiff's patent rights.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • ["Defendants be restrained from manufacturing etc. compositions infringing the plaintiff's letters patent" 'Infringing manufactures etc. be delivered up on oath' 'An account be taken of profits etc. and the amount paid to the plaintiff' 'Liberty to apply in Chambers for directions' "Defendants to pay the plaintiff's...