Ansell Healthcare Products LLC v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2)

Ansell Healthcare Products LLC v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) involved a patent dispute where Reckitt sought to amend its pleadings and withdraw certain admissions. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, with Rares J presiding. The primary legal issue was whether Reckitt could withdraw certain admissions it had made and amend its pleadings to introduce new contentions regarding the validity of the patent in suit.

The court examined the matter under the principles of case management, guided by sections 37M and 37N of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. These sections require the court to interpret and apply the rules in a way that promotes the overarching purpose of facilitating the just, quick, and inexpensive resolution of disputes. The court noted that allowing the withdrawal of admissions and the introduction of new contentions could significantly expand the scope and cost of the proceedings, potentially prejudicing the respondent. Rares J held that such an amendment would not be consistent with the overarching purpose of the civil practice and procedure provisions and was not in the interests of justice.

In conclusion, Rares J ruled that Reckitt should not be permitted to withdraw its admissions, except to clarify its position in relation to a specific paragraph. However, Reckitt was granted leave to amend its particulars of invalidity to raise new contentions regarding the manner of manufacture, fair basis, lack of clarity, and inutility of the patent. The court also addressed the costs associated with the amendments and the interlocutory application. The final orders included directions for the filing of further amended pleadings, evidence, and a joint experts report, as well as the scheduling of a case management conference and trial.