Temporary vs permanent injunctions in recent Federal Court patent infringement proceedings

The central principle underpinning the patent regime in Australia is that a patent holder has an exclusive right to exploit the invention that is the subject of the patent. For this reason, injunctive relief, rather than damages or an account of profits, is often the primary goal of an applicant in patent infringement proceedings.

Two recent Federal Court cases illustrate very different circumstances in which injunctions - one a temporary injunction and one a permanent injunction (or rather, an injunction for the remainder of the term of the patent) - were deemed appropriate.

Case 1:  UbiPark Pty Ltd v TMA Capital Australia Pty Ltd

In UbiPark Pty Ltd v TMA Capital Australia Pty Ltd  [2022] FCA 111, Justice Moshinsky granted an interlocutory injunction pursuant to section 128 of the Patents Act 1990 (Act) to restrain threats of patent infringement proceedings.