Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

UWA v Gray anatomises universities and IP

By Peter Jorm - posted Thursday, 27 February 2014


However, the case of UWA v Gray has a massive effect on the universities' position.

UWA v Gray

The facts of this case can be put simply. Dr Gray was a staff member of UWA. He (and his team) developed patentable inventions that had considerable commercial prospects. The University claimed the IP rights to the patents and the inventions and the right to exploit them commercially. The University had a statute in place that appeared to support its position.

Advertisement

Now the University's rights would seem unassailable, but the courts thought otherwise.

UWA took the matter to the Federal Court, where Dr Gray was successful. It then appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court where Dr Gray again succeeded. In October 2009 the University sought to take the matter to the High Court but that court declined to hear the matter, which indicated it was satisfied with the decisions of the courts below it.

Hence the decision of the Full Federal Court in UWA v Gray is the law in Australia.

How did the Full Federal Court arrive at its decision?

Terms of Dr Gray's Employment

Dr Gray was required by the terms of his appointment to teach and to conduct research.

Advertisement

As his contract of employment did not specifically state that IP developed in the course of his employment belonged to the University, then it belonged to him, regardless of his use of University facilities in the development of that IP.

Furthermore, 'research' does not imply any duty to 'invent'.

The Relevant Statute

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

2 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Peter Jorm is an administrative lawyer whose pro bono activities post retirement have involved him in aspects of commercial and intellectual property law.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Peter Jorm
Article Tools
Comment 2 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy