FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

Stack v Brisbane City Council [1999] FCA 1279

 


GEORGE STACK AND G S TECHNOLOGY PTY LTD v THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL, DAVIES SHEPHARD PTY LTD AND DAVIES SHEPHARD (QUEENSLAND) PTY LIMITED

NO QG 28 OF 1994

 

G S TECHNOLOGY PTY LTD v DAVIES SHEPHARD PTY LTD AND GSA INDUSTRIES (AUST) PTY LTD

NO QG 29 OF 1996

 

COOPER J

BRISBANE

15 SEPTEMBER 1999



IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

QG28 OF 1994

 

BETWEEN:

GEORGE STACK

First Applicant

 

G S TECHNOLOGY PTY LTD

Second Applicant

 

AND:

THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL

First Respondent

 

DAVIES SHEPHARD PTY LTD

Second Respondent

 

DAVIES SHEPHARD (QUEENSLAND) PTY LIMITED

Third Respondent

 


ON APPEAL FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS

 

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

QG29 OF 1996

 

BETWEEN:

G S TECHNOLOGY PTY LTD

Applicant

 

AND:

DAVIES SHEPHARD PTY LTD

First Respondent

 

GSA INDUSTRIES (AUST) PTY LTD

Second Respondent

 

JUDGE:

COOPER J

DATE:

15 SEPTEMBER 1999

PLACE:

BRISBANE


CORRIGENDUM


In the judgment of Justice Cooper, the following amendments are made :

 

1.         In the heading on the orders page, the “Date of Order” should read 15 September 1999;

2.         In the heading on the first page of the judgment, the “Date” should be replaced with 15 September 1999;

3.         At paragraph 40, line 2, there should be a full stop after “than that.” and the next word should be capitalised to read “The”, so that the sentences will read as follows :

                        “In the instant case, the registration of GST as the assignee of the petty patent in the Register on 23 October 1995 is evidence of nothing more than that.  The entry is prima facie ...”


4.         At paragraph 56, line 1, the word “second” should be inserted before the words “petty patent”, so that the sentence will read as follows :


                        “The application for the second petty patent was filed on 17 February 1994. ...”


5.         At paragraph 58, the word “second” should be inserted before the words “petty patent” in lines 3, 5 and 6, so that those sentences will read as follows :


                        “... The original application as disclosed in the request for the second petty patent, was number 85236/91 the application for a standard patent.  The applicant in 85236/91 was Stack alone.  Further, Grieves was not nominated for the grant of the second petty patent in the request filed 17 February 1994.  The notice of entitlement for the second petty patent filed 22 June 1995 was incorrect.”

 

6.         At paragraph 65, line 5, the date “17 February 1994” should be replaced with “25 August 1993”.


7.         At paragraph 71, line 1, the date “17 February 1994” should be replaced with “25 August 1993”

At line 3, the date “February 1994” should be replaced with “August 1993”.

At lines 4/5, the date “February 1994” should be replaced with “January 1994”.


8.         At paragraph 72, line 2, the word “also” should be inserted between the words “was the” and the date “28 June 1999” should read “28 June 1995”, so that the sentence should now read :


“It was also the basis of entitlement set out in paragraph 2 of the notice of entitlement filed on 28 June 1995. ...”


9.         At paragraph 77, line 4, the word “justice” should be replaced with the word “just”, so that the sentence now reads :


                        “It was further submitted that, in the absence of a “just claim” by another, including DS, DSQ or GSA, ... “


10.       In the certification, the date “15 September 1990” should be replaced with “15 September 1999”.


Associate:


Date:                9 May 2000