Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd (No 3)

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Judgment Date: 06 October 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] FCA 1189
• Date: 06 October 2022
• Court: Federal Court

Federal Court of Australia

Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd (No 3) [2022] FCA 1189

File number(s):	NSD 1040 of 2019
Judgment of:	ROFE J
Date of judgment:	6 October 2022
Catchwords:	PATENTS – where invention claimed is a core sample orientation device relating to a system and method for orienting core samples extracted from the ground – construction of patent – meaning of “predetermined time intervals” – whether respondents infringed patent in suit – held: respondents’ product infringed patent – accessorial liability for infringement: s 117 of Patents Act 1990 (Cth), authorisation and joint tortfeasorship – all respondents liable for infringing conduct ; PATENTS – invalidity – external fair basis and priority date – fourth respondent challenges priority date of patent claims on basis that they are not fairly based on the matter disclosed in the provisional – claims of patent found to be fairly based – cross-claim dismissed ; DAMAGES – applicants seeks orders for additional damages against each respondent per s 122A of Patents Act 1990 (Cth) – conduct of respondents in circumstances where lengthy litigation history exists between the parties and previous versions of the respondents’ product found to infringe patent – applicants entitled to an award of additional damages
Legislation:	Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) Patents Regulations 1991 (Cth)
Cases cited:	Apotex Pty Ltd v Les Laboratoires Servier (No 2) (2012) 293 ALR 272 Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd (2013) 304 ALR 1 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 1109 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 4) [2015] FCA 1372 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd (2019) 138 IPR 33 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd (No 3) [2022] FCA 596 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 445 Bristol-Myers Squibb Co v FH Faulding & Co Ltd (2000) 97 FCR 524 Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corp (No 2) (2019) 147 IPR 386 Collins v Northern Territory (2007) 161 FCR 549 Coretell Pty Ltd v Australia Mud Company Pty Ltd (2017) 250 FCR 155 Facton Ltd v Rifai Fashions Pty Ltd (2012) 95 IPR 95 Fuchs Lubricants (Australasia) Pty Ltd v Quaker Chemical (Australasia) Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 65 Generic Health v Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd (2013) 100 IPR 240 Globaltech Corp Pty Ltd v Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd (2019) 145 IPR 39 Hood v Down Under Enterprises International Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 69 Hytera Communications Corp Ltd v Motorola Solutions, Inc [2019] FCAFC 210 Inverness Medical Switzerland GmbH v MDS Diagnostics Pty Ltd (2010) 85 IPR 525 Jupiters Ltd v Neurizon Pty Ltd (2005) 65 IPR 86 Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Doric Products Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 274 Mead Corporation v Riverwood Multiple Packaging Division of Riverwood International Corporation [1997] FSR 484 MJA Scientifics International Pty Ltd v SC Johnson & Sons Pty Ltd (1998) 43 IPR 275 Northern Territory v Collins (2008) 235 CLR 619 Novartis AG v Pharmacor Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 58 Oxworks Trading Pty Ltd v Gram Engineering Pty Ltd (2019) 154 IPR 215 Playgro Pty Ltd v Playgro Art & Craft Manufactory Limited (2016) 117 IPR 489 Rehm Pty Ltd v Websters Security Systems (International) Pty Ltd (1988) 81 ALR 79 Rescare Ltd v Anaesthetic Supplies Pty Ltd (1992) 25 IPR 119 Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd (2012) 95 IPR 29 Seiko Epson Corporation v Calidad Pty Ltd (2017) 133 IPR 1 Société des Usines Chimiques Rhône-Poulenc v Commissioner of Patents (1958) 100 CLR 5 Streetworx Pty Ltd v Artcraft Urban Group Pty Ltd (2014) 110 IPR 82 The Koursk [1924] P 140 Thompson v Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd (1996) 186 CLR 574 University of New South Wales v Moorhouse (1975) 133 CLR 1
Division:	General Division
Registry:	New South Wales
National Practice Area:	Intellectual Property
Sub-area:	Patents and associated Statutes
Number of paragraphs:	440
Date of hearing:	8–10 March 2022, 14 March 2022
Counsel for the Applicants:	Mr C Dimitriadis SC with Ms P Arcus
Solicitor for the Applicants:	Gilbert + Tobin
Counsel for the Respondents:	Mr A Ryan SC with Mr A Fox SC
Solicitor for the First and Second Respondents:	Griffith Hack
Solicitor for the Third and Fourth Respondents:	Bird & Bird

ORDERS

		NSD 1040 of 2019
BETWEEN:	AUSTRALIAN MUD COMPANY PTY LTD First Applicant ; REFLEX INSTRUMENTS ASIA PACIFIC PTY LTD Second Applicant
AND:	GLOBALTECH CORPORATION PTY LTD First Respondent ; GLOBALTECH PTY LTD Second Respondent ; BOART LONGYEAR LIMITED (and another named in the Schedule) Third Respondent
AND BETWEEN:	BOART LONGYEAR AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Cross-Claimant
AND:	AUSTRALIAN MUD COMPANY PTY LTD Cross-Respondent

order made by:	ROFE J
DATE OF ORDER:	6 October 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The parties confer and, within 14 days of these orders, submit to the Associate to Justice Rofe an agreed minute of orders giving effect to these reasons.

2. Failing agreement, each party provide their proposed minute of orders within the same period as specified in order 1.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ROFE J:

Introduction

1. The First Applicant, Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd (AMC) is the registered owner of Australian Standard Patent No 2010200162 for an invention entitled “Core Sample Orientation” (the Patent).

2. The Second Applicant, Reflex Instruments Asia Pacific Pty Ltd (Reflex) is the exclusive licensee of the Patent. The Applicants are subsidiaries of the publicly listed company Imdex Limited (Imdex). I will refer to the Applicants as AMC in these reasons.

3. The claims in the Patent assert a priority date from Provisional Patent Application No 2004905021 (the Provisional) filed on 3 September 2004 (the Priority Date...