EOFY Sale · Save up to $750 off your legals · Ends 30 June

Claim offer
Selected cases

Federal Court of Australia - Full Court · [2026] FCAFC 66

Comino v Watson Webb

A Full Court IP case about confidential design drawings, registered designs, copyright and remedies in a product collaboration dispute.

Federal Court of Australia - Full Court21 May 2026

Plain-English explainers, not legal advice. Check the linked official source before you rely on a specific section, and get advice for your situation.

Get legal help

Start here

Quick read

  • Design drawings, product concepts and supplier collaboration materials can stay confidential even inside a messy commercial relationship.
  • A Full Court IP case about confidential design drawings, registered designs, copyright and remedies in a product collaboration dispute.

Use this to check

  • Design drawings should be shared under written confidentiality and permitted-use terms.
  • A collaborator's contribution does not automatically give them freedom to register or exploit the design.
  • Copyright, designs, confidence and ACL claims can overlap in product disputes.

Decision snapshot

  1. 1

    What happened

    • The case concerned intellectual property and confidential information in design drawings for products.
    • The dispute included ownership of registered designs, alleged misuse of confidential drawings, copyright infringement, Australian Consumer Law representations by silence, and whether correspondence about the designs was an unjustified threat under the Designs Act.
    • The appeal also raised whether a constructive trust over design rights went further than necessary.
  2. 2

    What the court had to decide

    • The Full Court had to consider whether design drawings were confidential, whether obligations of confidence and copyright infringement findings should stand, whether a constructive trust over registered design rights went beyond what was necessary, whether Australian Consumer Law representations by silence were established, and whether a Designs Act...
  3. 3

    What the court decided

    • The Full Court dealt with the appeal in part across confidentiality, design, copyright, ACL and remedy issues.
    • The judgment confirms the seriousness of misusing confidential product drawings, while also showing that remedies such as constructive trusts and threat findings need to be carefully matched to the rights actually established.

Practical impact

Practical read

  • Design drawings, product concepts and supplier collaboration materials can stay confidential even inside a messy commercial relationship.
  • The safer move is to document who owns what, why the material is being shared and what each party can do with it.

Useful next steps

  • Design drawings should be shared under written confidentiality and permitted-use terms.
  • A collaborator's contribution does not automatically give them freedom to register or exploit the design.
  • Copyright, designs, confidence and ACL claims can overlap in product disputes.
  • Remedies should be targeted to what is needed to do justice, especially where ownership is shared or disputed.
  • Use an NDA or collaboration agreement before sending design drawings or prototypes.

Practical read

Comino is an IP collaboration case. The useful business lesson is not about one magic clause. It is about the risk of sharing drawings, prototypes and product ideas without a clean record of ownership, permitted use and confidentiality.

The Full Court had to deal with several overlapping rights: confidential information, registered designs, copyright, consumer law and equitable remedies. That mix is common in real product businesses. A drawing can be confidential, protected by copyright, relevant to a design registration and commercially sensitive all at once.

For business owners, this case is a reminder to slow down before a supplier, distributor, manufacturer or collaborator receives technical drawings. Put the purpose of disclosure in writing, mark materials confidential, state who can register rights, and keep sign-off records so the business is not fighting about implied permissions years later.

Checks to run

Key points

  • Use an NDA or collaboration agreement before sending design drawings or prototypes.
  • Record whether the recipient can manufacture, modify, register or commercialise the design.
  • Keep dated versions of drawings, approvals, emails and sign-off notes.
  • Check design, copyright and trade mark rights before sending demand letters.
  • Avoid overreaching remedies or threats where ownership and contribution are not straightforward.

Key takeaways

  • Design drawings should be shared under written confidentiality and permitted-use terms.
  • A collaborator's contribution does not automatically give them freedom to register or exploit the design.
  • Copyright, designs, confidence and ACL claims can overlap in product disputes.
  • Remedies should be targeted to what is needed to do justice, especially where ownership is shared or disputed.

Related topics

IP & Brand ProtectionContracts & Commercial

How Sprintlaw can help

IP AssignmentContract Review