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 2026

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

Mine Güner discusses bridging law and business, taking the initiative, and why Taylor Swift helped put copyright on the map
Cindy Goh discusses why she launched Cheang & Ariff's IP department, the improving litigation environment in Malaysia and what to consider when using AI
Increased focus on adding patent litigation depth to the firm’s Dallas office was behind the boutique’s most recent hires
IPH's Canadian acquisitions are paying off on paper, but a couple of strong years may not be enough to show that the group's strategy has truly won over the market
Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Firms with established sports relationships and specialised expertise are well positioned to capture the market’s expanded pool of IP work
Gunjan Paharia discusses developing RIA, an AI platform built to draw on decades of institutional knowledge, support junior lawyers, and reshape how legal teams work
A strong Canadian business helped lift profits, but the IP service group's latest results underline the pressure facing its operations in Australia, New Zealand and parts of Asia
Wins in court have been key to the six-year-old firm’s growth, as one of its founders explains
Gift this article