AAPL Stock: 117.58 ( -0.72 )

Printed from

Samsung calls Australian tablet ban ‘grossly unjust’

updated 04:35 am EST, Fri November 25, 2011

Samsung's lawyers take on Apple in appeal court

Samsung's Australian lawyers have heavily criticized the Australian magistrate who ordered a temporary injunction on the sales of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia. At appeal hearing in Sydney late yesterday, Samsung's lawyers labeled the decision made by Justice Bennett as being "grossly unjust." Samsung's lawyers said that Justice Bennett had "misunderstood and misapplied" basic requirements of the law, reports the Sydney Morning Herald.

"We contend that the primary judge made a series of fundamental errors in her disposition of the interlocutory application. They were all errors of principle," Samsung's lawyer argued.

"Her honor misunderstood and misapplied the basic requirements concerning interlocutory injunctions as laid down in [previous cases]."

Samsung's lawyers argued that in ordering the temporary injunction, Justice Bennett needed to have a very strong prima facie case that Apple could effectively win a case against Samsung in its on going patent battle. In Samsung's view, Justice Bennett did not conduct the proper tests in order to be able to determine this.

"It [the Galaxy Tab 10.1] is stopped dead in its tracks, perhaps at a critical time in the development of this market," Samsung's lawyer posited.

At this early juncture, it appears that the appeal court, which is being heard by a full bench including Justice Dowsett, Justice Foster and Justice Yates, appears to demonstrating some sympathy to Samsung's arguments.

In response, one of the appeal judges made this comment:

"If you have a fast moving product which if taken off the market, destroys the opportunities available to the newcomer and preserves the monopoly of the incumbent then you'd have to have a very close look at the strength of the case."

Another judge was suspicious of Apple's earlier claim that Apple would suffer considerable damage had the 10.1 been able to launch. With a tone conveying more than a hint of irony he asked Apple's lawyers if "the whole of Apple's going to come tumbling down," if Samsung had been permitted to sell the Tab while awaiting a hearing on Apple's claims of patent infringement.

Apple's lawyers, of course, supported Justice Bennett's decision. The team argued that Justice Bennett would have been very aware of the way her decision would have impacted on Samsung's prospects for the 10.1 in the Australian market.

"It was not a case of her honour ticking boxes but rather engaging in a careful and detailed review," Apple's lawyer stated.

In one similar case taking place in the US, a federal court Judge, Lucy Koh, famously held the iPad 2 and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 above her head and asked Samsung's lawyers to point out which was the Samsung tablet. According to witnesses, it took Samsung's lawyers some time to get the right answer.

However, unlike Justice Bennett in Australia, Judge Koh felt that although the 10.1 probably infringed on some of Apple's patents, she decided against a temporary injunction as Apple could have a difficult time proving this in court.

The hearing appeal hearing in Australia continues.

by MacNN Staff



  1. global.philosopher

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Grossly unjust?

    I'm calling Samsung's blatant copying and lack of imagination grossly pathetic.

  1. global.philosopher

    Joined: Dec 1969


    What this case does not cover is integrity and cla

    Samsung has for years shown lack of any integrity and class and imagination. Samsung have never done anything but to enter markets created by other hard working dedicated imaginative people. They should be treated like the pathetic company they are.

  1. SockRolid

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Samsung did it to themselves

    Square corners, or a different color, and Samsung would be selling dozens, or maybe even hundreds, of Galaxy Tab 10.1s in Australia. Samsung would have fought for an injunction against counterfeit Samsung TVs. Apple did fight for an injunction against counterfeit iPads. They won.

    Oh, and in the pad computing space, Android has been "stopped dead in its tracks" around the world. Even without any legal action by Apple. "Winning."

  1. ElectroTech

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Boycott the copyist

    Samsung needs to be taught a lesson to do their own innovation and quit copying Apple and others. Boycott them in the strongest way. Don't buy any of their products.

  1. BigMac2

    Joined: Dec 1969


    comment title

    “If you have a fast moving product which if taken off the market, destroys the opportunities available to the newcomer and preserves the monopoly of the incumbent then you'd have to have a very close look at the strength of the case.”

    Apple took near a decade on developing a touch oriented platform, iOS started at Apple on tablet prototype first before doing the iPhone. Apple earns every dollars for products they sold, Samsung in the other hands took Apple design, took Android shortcuts and barf product on the market without any plan for creating a long lasting plateform and keeping older product up to date.

  1. slapppy

    Joined: Dec 1969



    No Samsung in this household. Plus I have spread the word to friends, colleagues and family to boycott Samsung. Enough of supporting companies that rip off Apple.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Ultimate Ears Megaboom Bluetooth Speaker

Ultimate Ears (now owned by Logitech) has found great success in the marketplace with its "Boom" series of Bluetooth speakers, a mod ...

Kinivo URBN Premium Bluetooth Headphones

We love music, and we're willing to bet that you do, too. If you're like us, you probably spend a good portion of your time wearing ...

Jamstik+ MIDI Controller

For a long time the MIDI world has been dominated by keyboard-inspired controllers. Times are changing however, and we are slowly star ...


Most Commented