Join us for an online webinar on the law of support in Australia, including discussion of the recent decision in MSD v. Wyeth. 

A link to access the online webinar will provided with confirmation of registration.

On 14 October 2020, Burley J gave judgment in Merck Sharp and Dohme v Wyeth (No 3) [2020] FCA 1477.  Among many issues determined by his Honour, Burley J held invalid claims for a multivalent immunogenic composition comprising 13 identified serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae for lack of support under s 40(3) of the Patents Act 1990 (in its post-Raising the Bar form).  The Court construed “comprising” inclusively, meaning that a composition comprised of more than 13 serotypes would infringe, as long as the specified 13 were present.  The Court found that there was no support for a composition with more than the specified 13 serotypes.  In doing so, it relied on the decision of the UK Supreme Court in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc (Respondent) v Kymab Ltd (Appellant) [2020] UKSC 27. 

Our speaker, Neil Murray SC, will discuss the law of support in Australia, including its relationship with disclosure (the successor to sufficiency), and the influence of UK law, with reference to these decisions.

Our speaker

Neil Murray SC came to the NSW Bar in 2004 and was appointed Senior Counsel in 2018. He specialises in intellectual property law and chiefly practises in patent, copyright, trade mark, confidential information, consumer protection and other commercial/equity matters.  He has appeared in some of Australia’s leading intellectual property cases including:

• Apotex v sanofi-aventis (patentability of methods of medical treatment, High Court)
• Northern Territory v Collins (indirect patent infringement, High Court),
• AstraZeneca v Apotex (patent obviousness, High Court)
• Roadshow Films v iiNet (liability of ISPs for copyright infringement, Full Federal Court)
• EMI v Larrikin (the Down Under/Kookaburra case, reproduction of a substantial part of a well-known children’s song in a famous rock song, Full Federal Court)
• Apple v Samsung (the Australian chapter of multinational patent litigation over smartphone and tablet technology, Federal Court).

Neil is recognised as one of Australia’s leading intellectual property senior counsel by Doyle’s Guide,

He appears for, and advises, clients across a range of industries, including pharmaceuticals (originator and generic), mining, information technology, telecommunications, music, consumer goods, liquor, gaming, finance and local government. He appears chiefly in the Federal Court of Australia in Sydney and Melbourne, and elsewhere as required.  He also appears in the High Court, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the Patents Office, the Trade Marks Office, and the Copyright Tribunal; and at mediations.