Pinpoint · Judgment search

H Lundbeck A/S v Commissioner of Patents

[2019] FCA 535

Federal Court of Australia · 12 April 2019 · Official judgment

Cited by 1 indexed judgment

All Cited 1

2019: 1 citing judgment 2019 2020 2022 2024 2026
citing judgments per year of which distinguished, doubted, not followed or overruled · line marks the decision

Sort: Oldest first Newest first Most cited

  1. Squirrel Limited v Cadmon Advisory Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 1006 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment

Tree of authority

Built on

The authorities this case relies on, earliest first, and the authorities those relied on. Open a branch to go further back.

Built upon

Later cases citing this one, in order of decision, and the cases citing them in turn. The most cited are shown at each level.

Authorities cited (11)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Yat Tung Investment Co Ltd v Dao Heng Bank Ltd [1975] AC 581 Cited cited 57×
  2. Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc [1981] HCA 39 Cited cited 623×
  3. Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd [1981] HCA 45 Cited cited 1,021×
  4. Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun (No 2) [1981] VR 81 Cited cited 20×
  5. Bryant v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1995] FCA 1299 Cited cited 78×
  6. Macquarie Bank Ltd v National Mutual Life Association of Australia Ltd (1996) 40 NSWLR 543 Cited cited 96×
  7. BC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1669 Cited cited 33×
  8. BC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 221 Cited cited 36×
  9. Wong v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 242 Cited cited 71×
  10. H. Lundbeck A/S v Commissioner of Patents [2017] FCA 56 Cited cited 5×
  11. H. Lundbeck A/S v Sandoz Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1797 Cited cited 13×
How the citator works

Citations are read from the text of each indexed judgment. A report citation written alongside a neutral citation, such as [2008] HCA 9; (2008) 234 CLR 50, teaches the citator that both name the same case, so later citations by either are counted together.

Treatment is read from the words in the sentence that cites the case: overruled or disapproved; not followed or declined to follow; distinguished or distinguishable; doubted; applied, followed or adopted. Anything else is cited. It is a guide to which judgments to read, not a judicial history: a judgment that discusses a case at length without one of those words is shown as citing it, and one mentioning several cases in a sentence may attach the word to all of them.

Only judgments in this index are counted, mostly the High Court, the Federal Court and New South Wales courts and tribunals since 2006. Earlier cases appear as authorities but their own authorities are unknown, so a tree ends there. Check a treatment by reading the passage before relying on it.

Judgment text is from the Open Australian Legal Corpus (Isaacus, CC BY 4.0) and the courts’ own websites. Each judgment links to its official version: read it before relying on anything here.