The recent
Meat & Livestock Australia Limited v Cargill, Inc
(MLA) Federal Court decision has brought the significant
differences that exist between Australian and US "gene
patent" practice into sharp focus. These differences
predominantly arise from the peculiarities of the
US and
AU Myriad decisions as well as the
US Mayo v. Prometheus and Ariosa v.
Sequenom decisions.
In considering the patent eligibility of isolated
naturally-occurring gene sequences, the Australian High Court
focussed predominantly on the concept of "genetic
information". Consequently, when the High Court ruled against
"gene patents", the decision excluded from patent
eligibility only isolated naturally-occurring gene sequences and
non-naturally occurring gene sequences that encompass
naturally-occurring genetic information – including
artificially created sequences such as cDNA. Under the High Court
decision, isolated products of nature other than gene sequences
(such as proteins and
