CASE NOTE: Liberation Developments Pty Ltd v Lomax Group
Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 1180
"Purposive construction" is now well entrenched in
Australian judicial authority as a cornerstone to claim
construction. However, as Lord Hoffman mused, there appears to
exist "a tendency to regard [purposive construction] as a
vague description of some kind of divination which mysteriously
penetrates beneath the language of the specification".1
In this vein we reflect on Liberation Developments v
Lomax and the likely success a patentee may have in stretching
the scope of their monopoly through purposive construction.
We also consider the risks of asserting to customers that the
actions of a competitor constitute infringing behaviour.
