1 Nov 2017
BAYER NEW ZEALAND LIMITED v MERIAL LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2946
- Citation
- [2017] NZHC 2946
- Court
- High Court
The Commissioner did not err in principle and acted within discretion: the disputed evidence (including D30 and expert tests) was sufficiently responsive to the evidential dialogue opened by Bayer's experiments and demonstrably relevant, the Australian decision relying on the same material made exclusion artificial, and public interest in resolving patentability on best available evidence outweighed delay and prejudice; accordingly the appeal is dismissed except that particular items of reply evidence were excluded as inadmissible (specified in orders).