Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Company Ltd

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation[2011] FCAFC 156
Year2011
Date2011
CourtFull Federal Court (Australia)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
116 cases
5 firm's commentaries
  • Reckitt Benckiser Throws Cold Water On Procter & Gamble's New "30 Minute Miracle" Dishwashing Tablet
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 22 May 2023
    ...Home) Australia Pty Ltd v Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited [2023] FCA 383 at [134], citing Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc [2011] FCAFC 156; 217 FCR 238 at The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soug......
  • STOP in the name of the law - interlocutory injunctions
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 1 February 2012
    ...Christmas. Footnotes 1 Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Co. Limited [2011] FCA 1164 2 Samsung Electronics Co. Limited v Apple Inc. [2011] FCAFC 156 3 Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Co. Limited [2011] HCATrans The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subjec......
  • A need for Rescue of traders who borrow aspects of the get up of competitor products
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 19 August 2021
    ...or 'relatively strong' in all of the circumstances in accordance with the principles in Samsung Electronics Co. Limited v Apple Inc. [2011] FCAFC 156, resulting in finding that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of the interlocutory The Full Court also rejected Martin's contentio......
  • Limeburst v Freshburst? Application for finger limes interlocutory falls flat
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 17 March 2012
    ...J relied on the traditional principles most recently expounded by the Full Federal Court in Samsung Electronics Co Limited v Apple Inc [2011] FCAFC 156. Namely, in order to secure an interlocutory injunction, the applicant must show there is a serious question to be tried or that there is a......
  • Get Started for Free