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

The case of F.Hoffman-La Roche AG v New England Biolabs Inc involved a dispute over a patent application for a purified thermostable DNA polymerase. The matter came before the court on appeal from a decision of a delegate of the Commissioner of Patents, pursuant to section 60(5) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). New England Biolabs opposed the grant of the patent, and the court was tasked with determining the nature of the appeal, the onus of proof, and the relevance of evidence presented. The central issue before the court was whether the appeal was a full hearing of factual issues on the merits or if it was limited to the scope prescribed by the legislative scheme. Additionally, the court had to consider the relevance of evidence presented by New England Biolabs that was acquired after the priority date.

The court found that the appeal was not limited to the scope prescribed by the legislative scheme and allowed for a full hearing of the factual issues on the merits. The court held that the onus was on New England Biolabs to clearly establish that the patent would be invalid. The court further determined that evidence presented by New England Biolabs, even if acquired after the priority date, was relevant to the case being pursued. The court held that the nature of the appeal did not limit the evidence that could be adduced, and the onus on New England Biolabs was not to establish that it was "practically certain" that the patent would be invalid, but rather to clearly make out their case.

In conclusion, the court allowed New England Biolabs to present evidence that was relevant to their case, even if acquired after the priority date. The court found that the appeal was not limited by the legislative scheme and allowed for a full hearing of the factual issues on the merits. The onus was on New England Biolabs to clearly establish that the patent would be invalid. The final orders of the court were that New England Biolabs could present the evidence they wished to adduce, and the appeal would proceed to a full hearing on the merits.