Wellcome Foundation Ltd v Commissioner of Patents

The Wellcome Foundation Ltd (Wellcome) sought to appeal a decision of the Commissioner of Patents concerning the grant of a patent for a new type of vaccine. The Commissioner had refused to grant the patent, and Wellcome brought the matter before the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the invention, a vaccine for the prevention of a specific disease, was a "manner of manufacture" within the meaning of section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies, which is incorporated into Australian patent law. This required the Court to consider the patentability of a biological product and the process by which it was produced.

The Court's reasoning focused on the established principles of patent law, particularly the requirement that an invention must be a manner of manufacture to be patentable. Gibbs, Stephen, Mason, Murphy and Wilson JJ considered whether a vaccine, being a product of biological processes, fell within this definition. They analysed previous case law and the nature of the invention, ultimately concluding that the vaccine, as a product of a specific, artificial process, constituted a manner of manufacture. The Court distinguished the invention from mere discoveries of natural phenomena, emphasizing the inventive step and practical application involved in its creation and use.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's decision and remitting the matter back to the Commissioner with a direction that the application for a patent should be granted.