Australia: No extraterritorial operation of Australian patents

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

Australia: No extraterritorial operation of Australian patents

Australian courts have recently adopted a restrictive reading of the extra territorial operation of Australian patents.

In Load and Move Pty Ltd v Container Rotation Systems Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 843, the plaintiff owned a patent directed to a container rotation system. It sued the defendants, alleging infringement of the patent. The infringement allegation was peculiar. It alleged the defendants had contracted for the foreign manufacture in China of a container rotation system which was to be supplied to Eritrea. Thus the system was never going to enter the Australian territory, even though the supply was being orchestrated from Australia.

The judge refused to grant preliminary discovery and to entertain an infringement finding. As the contract for manufacture and sale was to be performed totally outside the jurisdiction, there was no exploitation of the patent for the purposes of infringement.

The case points to a restrictive reading by the Australian judiciary of the territorial operation of Australian patents. Given the rapid development of internet-type sales channels, this is perhaps unfortunate, as it may allow the effective exploitation of patent rights by Australian entities, provided that exploitation occurs wholly outside the country.

Peter Treloar


Shelston IP

Level 21, 60 Margaret Street

Sydney NSW 2000, Australia

Tel: +61 2 9777 1111

Fax: +61 2 9241 4666

email@shelstonip.com

www.shelstonip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Anousha Davies, associate and trademark attorney at Birketts, unpicks how the university’s reputation enabled it to see off a proposed trademark for ‘Cambridge Rowing’
IP lawyers, who say they are encouraging clients to build up ‘tariff resilience’, should treat the risks posed by recent orders as a core consideration in cross-border licensing
Regulatory changes and damages risks are prompting Canadian firms and clients to opt for settlements in generic and biosimilar cases
News of Via Licensing Alliance adding two new members and Nokia’s proposal to extend interim licences to Warner Bros Discovery and Paramount were also among the top talking points
A new claim filed by Ericsson, and a request for access to documents, were also among recent developments
Cooley and Stikeman Elliott advised 35Pharma on the deal, which will allow GSK to get its hands on S235, an investigational medicine for pulmonary hypertension
Simon Wright explains why the UK should embrace the possibility of rejoining the UPC, and reveals how CIPA is reacting to this month’s historic Emotional Perception AI case at the UK Supreme Court
Matthew Grady of Wolf Greenfield says AI presents an opportunity in patent practice for stronger collaboration between in-house and outside counsel
Aparna Watal, head of trademarks at Halfords IP, discusses why lawyers must take a stand when advising clients and how she balances work, motherhood and mentoring
Discussion hosted by Bird & Bird partners also hears that UK courts’ desire to determine FRAND rates could see the jurisdiction penalised in a similar way to China
Gift this article