F. Hoffman-La Roche AG v New England Biolabs Inc

The case between F. Hoffman-La Roche AG and New England Biolabs Inc was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on the appointment of an assessor under section 217 of the Patents Act 1990, a statutory provision that allows for the appointment of an assessor to assist in the resolution of patent disputes. The parties were unable to agree on a suitable candidate for the role of assessor, necessitating court intervention.

The primary legal issue before the court was the interpretation and application of section 217 of the Patents Act 1990. Specifically, the court needed to determine the procedure for selecting an assessor when the parties could not agree on a suitable candidate. The court had to ensure that the process was fair and adhered to the statutory requirements, while also facilitating a timely resolution of the underlying patent dispute.

The court issued detailed orders to facilitate the selection of an assessor. New England Biolabs, Inc was required to provide a list of independent persons who were qualified to act as an assessor. F. Hoffman-La Roche AG was then to indicate whether any of these persons were acceptable, or alternatively, provide a list of acceptable candidates. If the parties could not agree on an assessor, the court granted liberty to apply for the matter to be restored to the list. The court also mandated the exchange of proposed forms of letters to be sent to prospective assessors and required both parties to notify each other if any person on the list was approached in connection with these proceedings. The proceedings were stood over for directions to be heard on 10 December 1999 at 9.30am, and the motion filed by New England Biolabs, Inc was also stood over part-heard to the same date and time for directions only.

The court's orders aimed to ensure a structured and transparent process for selecting an assessor, thereby facilitating the efficient resolution of the underlying patent dispute. The orders reflected the court's commitment to adhering to the statutory requirements and promoting a fair and expeditious resolution of the matter.