Whether certain implied representations as to the clinical efficacy of deodorant products amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct for the purposes of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) was examined by the Federal Court of Australia in its recent decision in Unilever Australia Ltd v Beiersdorf Australia Ltd [2018] FCA 2076.
Wiggle has paid a penalty after wrongfully representing that it was not liable for its faulty products under Australian law because it was based overseas.
Earlier this month, we reported on the Full Court’s decision in Generic Health v Bayer [2018] FCAFC 183, in which the Full Court clarified that when estimating or valuing a lost opportunity or assessing a hypothetical counterfactual for any scenario short of certainty, some discount must be made to reflect that less than certain position.
Whether inventions relating to the use of a computer are patentable according to the ‘manner of manufacture’ test has for many years been unclear in Australia.
Last year, Bayer was awarded more than $25 million (plus interest and indemnity costs) against Generic Health in the first Federal Court award of damages for pharmaceutical patent infringement.