Decisions, decisions: Damages or an account of profits for patent infringement?

This article provides a detailed review of the Australian position with respect to monetary remedies for patent infringement. In doing so, occasional reference is made to how corresponding issues have been dealt with in the UK, US and Canada, but the primary focus is on the few decided Australian cases, namely Advanced Building Systems Pty Ltd v Ramset Fasteners (Aust) Pty Ltd (2001) 52 IPR 305; Pearce v Paul Kingston Pty Ltd (1992) 25 IPR 591; Unilin Beeher BV v Huili Building Materials Pty Ltd and Others (No 2) (2007) 74 IPR 345 and Dart Industries Inc v Decor Corporation Pty Ltd (1992) 179 CLR 101, and their practical implications for patent infringement litigants.