The High Court will deliver two judgments next week on Wednesday, 5 November 2014.
The first is in the case of Alphapharm Pty Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S, a challenge to a decision by the Commissioner of Patents (upheld by the AAT and the Full Federal Court) to extend the time within which Lundbeck could make an application to extend the term of the Patent held for an anti-depressant drug marketed by Lundbeck in various forms under the names Cipramil and Lexapro. At its heart is an argument about the proper construction of the Patents Act and the regulations made thereunder. But it has profound commercial significance for Lundbeck and its competitors (who had already placed generic versions of the drugs on the market prior to the extension) as well as for the public health budget.
The second is the case of Wellington Capital Limited v ASIC. This case addresses the relationship between provisions commonly found in the Constitution of managed investment schemes to the effect that the Responsible Entity has all powers legally possible for a corporation as if it were the absolute owner of the scheme property and acting in its personal capacity, conferring power to dispose of and deal with the scheme property as if it were the beneficial owner of the property, and the provisions of section 601FC of the Corporations Act 2001, which provides that a Responsible Entity holds scheme property on trust for the scheme members.