Su v Chang

The Full Federal Court heard an appeal in *Su v Chang*. The dispute concerned the validity of a notice of objection to a patent application. The applicant, Mr Chang, had filed a patent application, and the objector, Ms Su, had lodged a notice of objection. The primary issue was whether Ms Su's notice of objection was validly served on Mr Chang.

The court was required to determine whether the service of the notice of objection complied with the requirements of the *Patents Act 1990* (Cth) and the *Patents Regulations 1991* (Cth), specifically concerning the method of service on a party represented by an attorney. The central question was whether service on Mr Chang's attorney constituted valid service on Mr Chang himself, given the terms of the relevant legislation and the power of attorney granted.

The Full Federal Court held that the notice of objection had not been validly served. The Court reasoned that while a power of attorney may authorise an attorney to act on behalf of a principal in many matters, the *Patents Act* and *Regulations* prescribe specific methods for service of documents. In this instance, the legislation required service to be effected on the applicant directly, or in a manner specifically permitted by the regulations, which did not extend to service on an attorney in the circumstances presented. The Court emphasised the importance of strict compliance with statutory service provisions in patent proceedings.

Consequently, the Full Federal Court allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of the delegate of the Commissioner of Patents. The Court found that the notice of objection was invalid due to defective service, meaning the opposition proceedings could not validly commence.