Aristocrat v Commissioner of Patents [2025]: One Step in Favour of Computer Implemented Inventions

In recent years, Applicants have faced challenges obtaining granted patents for computer implemented inventions.

Australian Courts have previously struggled to outline a singular test for determining the patentability of computer implemented inventions. While Australian Courts have sought to provide a unique test for patentability for computer implemented inventions, these unique tests have resulted in inconsistency for Applicants.  

Unfortunately, this inconsistency has led to increased costs and reduced certainty for Applicants interested in seeking protection for computer implemented inventions.

With there being no singular test, the Australian Patent Office has devised different tests to be applied to computer implemented inventions during their examination. Ultimately, this has made it more difficult for Applicants to assess whether their inventions meet the threshold test and obtain granted patents for computer implemented invention in Australia.

A Change in Approach to Computer Implemented Inventions

Examiners from the Australian Patent Office commonly argue that computer implemented inventions that solely use generic computer hardware are not patentable, regardless of the invention itself. 

In Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2025] FCAFC 131 “Aristocrat [2025]”, the justices instead found that it is too rigid and narrow to say that a computer implemented invention using conventional computer technology for well known and well understood functions, cannot involve patentable subject matter.

This appears to be a direct repudiation of the approach taken by Examiners from the Australian Patent Office and may allow for Applicants to more easily overcome patentable subject matter objections in the future.

The Court has now moved to a broader test for finding patentable subject matter, which involves determining if the invention is:

1. an abstract idea manipulated on a computer; or,
2. an abstract idea implemented on a computer to produce an artificial state of affairs and a useful result.

This test is aligned with how non-computer implemented inventions are evaluated and appears to be more favourable to Applicants. In particular, any computer implemented inventions that lead to a useful result, which most computer implemented inventions should easily be able to show, will now involve patentable subject matter.

It is now likely that Applicants will face less resistance in obtaining patents in Australia for computer implemented inventions.

Key Takeaways

Before Aristocrat [2025], computer implemented inventions (such as electronic game machines, software for diagnostic systems, software for communications systems, data compression techniques, network optimisations and Artificial Intelligence based systems) were caught up in IP Australia’s overly strict practices when assessing patentable subject matter.

After Aristocrat [2025], these computer implemented inventions, and others, should now find greater success in Australia. 

The Commissioner may also decide to challenge this result, which could lead to further cases in the future.

Stay tuned to our articles to keep up to date as this matter further develops.

Further Advice

If you have further queries about the drafting and prosecution of patents, infringement proceedings, or recent patent law developments in Australia, please contact MBIP via email on mail@mbip.com.au or via our online form. Our experienced team of attorneys would be glad to assist.