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

Acquisition of platform developed by Boehmert & Boehmert lawyer set to create a combined platform for patent drafting and prosecution in Europe
Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
A team from Cooley shares how they overturned a massive damages award by emphasising that the opposing company’s trade secrets claims were time-barred
Sponsored by Licks Attorneys
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants
Gift this article