Australian court overturns Apple’s Galaxy ban

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Australian court overturns Apple’s Galaxy ban

The Full Federal Court of Australia has today overturned an interim injunction banning the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer

The three judge panel unanimously overturned the Judge Annabelle Bennett's decision to grant Apple an injunction, but stayed the order until Friday afternoon to give Apple a chance to apply for special leave to appeal the decision to the High Court.

In a 48-page decision, the Full Court has found that Apple did not establish a prima facie case for infringement of either of the two patents at issue and that Bennett incorrectly assessed the balance of convenience when deciding to grant an injunction.

The decision also dismisses the relevance of Samsung's reluctance to accede to Apple's request for a limited early trial - a factor that Bennett had counted against Samsung in her October decision.

The Australian leg of the global dispute between Apple and Samsung began in August this year with Apple claiming that Samsung's Galaxy 10.1 tablet computer infringed 10 of its patents - it later raised that number to 13.

Samsung redesigned its tablet to try and get around Apple's patents, but the California-based company maintained that three of its patents were still infringed. The final hearings on the interim injunction focused on just two patents.

Samsung has also fought back in Australia by trying to get an interim injunction against Apple over its new iPhone 4S. It has since dropped the interim injunction application in exchange for an expedited full trial that will start in March next year.

"Samsung Electronics Australia is pleased with today's unanimous decision by the Federal Court to lift the preliminary injunction on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1," the company said in a statement.

"We believe the ruling clearly affirms that Apple's legal claims lack merit."

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As Marshall Gerstein celebrates its 70-year anniversary, Jeffrey Sharp, managing partner, reflects on lessons that shaped both his career and the firm’s success
News of two pharma deals involving Novo Nordisk and GSK and a loss for Open AI were also among the top talking points
Howard Hogan, IP partner at Gibson Dunn, says AI deepfakes are driving lawyers to rethink how IP protects creativity and innovation
Vivien Chan joins us for our ‘Women in IP’ series to discuss gender bias in the legal profession and why the business model followed by law firms leaves little room for women leaders
Partner Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of IPNote, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, has taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Gift this article