Catchwords:

HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – question of correct approach to remittal and subsequent appeal – where equally divided decision of six High Court Justices resulted in preceding Full Federal Court decision being affirmed pursuant to s 23(2)(a) of Judiciary Act 1902 (Cth) – where, on remitter of Full Court’s decision, the primary judge was to determine residual issues “in light of” Full Court’s reasons – where primary judge upheld Full Court’s reasoning – where High Court had unanimously rejected Full Court’s reasoning

HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – whether primary judge was bound to follow Full Court’s reasoning – doctrine of precedent considered – only unanimous or majority decisions of High Court have binding authority – where no seriously considered dicta of a majority in High Court decision – primary judge was bound

HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – whether this Full Court is bound to follow previous Full Court’s reasoning – where ‘compelling reason’ to depart from Full Court’s reasoning, being the High Court’s criticism – Full Court not bound

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – whether appeal can be allowed without finding error on part of primary judge – legal principles considered – ‘constructive error’ found, as distinct from criticism of primary judge’s approach

PATENTS – whether claimed computer-implemented invention is a manner of manufacture within meaning of s 18(1A)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) – approach of High Court’s allowing reasons adopted, as opposed to previous Full Court’s proposed alternative approach – where manner of manufacture depends on characterisation – where characterisation determined in light of specification as a whole – where appropriate approach to computer-implemented invention is whether subject matter is (i) an abstract idea manipulated on a computer; or (ii) an abstract idea implemented on a computer to produce an artificial state of affairs and useful result – claim 1 held to be a manner of manufacture – residual claims therefore also a manner of manufacture by analogy with claim 1