Kinabalu Investments Pty Ltd v Barron & Rawson Pty Ltd

[2008] FCAFC 178

Full Court of the Federal Court

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Patents
2. › Invalidity
3. › Lack of novelty
4. › Anticipation by prior patent
5. › Construction of claims
6. › Whether prior art disclosed all integers of claim
7. › Whether 'mounted on' required physical connection through side wall
8. › Patents Act 1990 (Cth), ss 18, 138
1. Patents
2. › Construction of claims
3. › Principles of claim construction
4. › Role of specification in construing claims
5. › Whether preferred embodiments in specification can narrow unqualified claim
6. › Whether expert evidence on construction can carry the day
1. Patents
2. › Invalidity
3. › Lack of novelty
4. › Test for anticipation
5. › Whether prior publication gives clear and unmistakable directions
6. › Whether prior publication must disclose composite beam effect not mentioned in claims

Quick Take

Expert evidence importing concepts not mentioned in the claims or specification (such as a 'composite beam effect') will not be accepted as a basis for narrowing claim construction.

Case Details

Citation[2008] FCAFC 178

CourtFCAFC

JurisdictionCommonwealth

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.

6 of the 20 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.

Cited by20

2026Nalco Company v Cytec Industries IncFCAFC 72
2024Novartis AG v Pharmacor Pty Limited (No 3)FCA 1307
2023Jusand Nominees Pty Ltd v Rattlejack Innovations Pty LtdFCAFC 178
2023UbiPark Pty Ltd v TMA Capital Australia Pty Ltd (No 2)FCA 885
and 16 more after sign-in

Relies on

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in