INVERNESS MEDICAL INNOVATIONS INC AND ANOR V MDS DIAGNOSTICS LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2007-404-748

INVERNESS MEDICAL INNOVATIONS INC AND ANOR V MDS DIAGNOSTICS LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2007-404-748

The court accepted that plaintiffs made a genuine attempt to comply with the joinder conditions and that the deficiencies identified, while real, are not so serious as to deprive the defendants of a fair opportunity to respond or to nullify the earlier joinder order; defendants retain procedural remedies including strike out or application for further particulars and the court imposed a timetable governing either route.

Citation
openlaw-1f7ab98c_a0f7_47d8_a15b_d9255b7527cc.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: Inverness Medical Innovations Inc; Second Plaintiff: Inverness Medical Switzerland GmbH; First Defendant: MDS Diagnostics Limited; Second Defendant: Prakash Appanna
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
15 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Proceedings Involving Alleged Copyright Infringement / Interlocutory Hearing on Compliance With Joinder Conditions and Potential Strike Out/further Particulars
Outcome
Conditional joinder upheld; defendants given choice to challenge or to file defences; court issued procedural timetable and reserved costs.
Legal Topics
Joinder, Particulars of Claim, Industrial Application, Infringement Allegations, Strike Out, Discovery/directions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inverness Medical Innovations Inc

First Plaintiff

Inverness Medical Switzerland GmbH

Second Plaintiff

MDS Diagnostics Limited

First Defendant

Prakash Appanna

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Proceedings Involving Alleged Copyright Infringement / Interlocutory Hearing on Compliance With Joinder Conditions and Potential Strike Out/further Particulars

  1. 1 Whether the second amended statement of claim identifies the exact copyright works relied on
  2. 2 Whether the pleading distinguishes original aspects of the works from material copied from earlier works
  3. 3 Whether the pleading specifies when the works were industrially applied

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted that plaintiffs made a genuine attempt to comply with the joinder conditions and that the deficiencies identified, while real, are not so serious as to deprive the defendants of a fair opportunity to respond or to nullify the earlier joinder order; defendants retain procedural remedies including strike out or application for further particulars and the court imposed a timetable governing either route.

Court Disposition

Conditional joinder upheld; defendants given choice to challenge or to file defences; court issued procedural timetable and reserved costs.

Orders

  • If defendants elect to challenge, file application(s) by 4 September 2008 and matter listed for mention 5 September 2008
  • If defendants elect to respond: statement of defence and/or counterclaim to be filed by 4 September 2008