Legal Issues in Bones and Bumps Orthopaedic Hospital Case

[Instructor name]

[Course]

Table of Contents

Introduction1

Facts about the case1

Identified legal issues2

Legal actions in the case3

Illegal actions in the case5

Conclusions and recommendations7

References8

Legal Issues in Bones and Bumps Orthopaedic Hospital Case

Introduction

This case study deals with the problem of illegal actions and behaviours exhibited by participants in the case study. It becomes clear that the people in the case study are engaging in actions that are both legal and illegal. Hence, they do not have much understanding of the legal concerns. For example, of the case study actors gets the patent in his name instead of in the name of the company which is the research lab.



Identified Legal Issues

There are several legal issues in the case. First, the Whizkid has patented the new prosthesis in his own name instead in the name of the hospital or the research lab which is Genetic Farm Private Research Facility. Furthermore, Whizkid and geneticist colleague have also applied for another patent with the Australian Commonwealth Government Intellectual Property Office. This patent application has been made with respect to the genetic spindle technology. However, the employment contract of the colleague clearly specifies that he cannot disclose any classified information regarding the employment to any outside or third party.

Next, it has also transpired to the Cousin that the prosthesis and the genetic spindle are not registered with the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG) of the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Furthermore, the doctor has also not conducted any clinical trials of the two new products (TGA, 2011, http://www.tga.gov.au/industry/basics-regulation.htm).

Additionally, Dr. Bolt also employs the regular registered nurses as surgical assistants in the operation theatre. Then, after the successful operation, the doctor increases the bill amount by $8,500 unilaterally without providing any such billing increase information to Johnson in advance. Finally, the police do not pay any heed to Cousin's complaint and instead refer him to the freedom of information laws (The Patents Act 1903-1921, 1921).

Legal Actions in the Case

There are several acts in the case which are wholly or partially legal. First, the geneticist who has developed the genetic spindle can apply for a patent with the Commonwealth Government Intellectual Property Office Australia as his employment contract does not prohibit him from doing so (TGA, 2011, http://www.tga.gov.au/industry/basics-regulation.htm). The employment contract of the geneticist with the hospital only keeps him from disclosing classified information of the hospital to outside third parties. However, placing an application with the Intellectual Property Office does not comprise disclosing hospital information to other third parties. It is even when the patent application will involve complete description and development process of the genetic spindle. The Commonwealth Government Intellectual Property Office Australia is not a third party, and will not make the patent information public until the patent has been granted to the inventor. In the latter case, no one will be able to copy the invention of the geneticist (Walsh, 1905).

Next, the doctor also has complete authority to bill Johnson. He has been authorised by the hospital to bill all of ...