References: [1853] EngR 1051, (1853) 17 Beav 532, (1853) 51 ER 1141
Links: Commonlii
To a bill for the infringement of a patent, the Defendant pleaded that the Plaintiff was not the first inventor. Held, that the Defendant need not answer any fact alleged by the bill, which would not be evidence to go to a jury on such an issue. As, for instance, the accuracy of the specification ; the novelty of the process ; the assignment af the patent ; the expenditure of money on it ; the obtaining Scotch and Irish patents for the process or allegations as to the opinions of third parties as to the invention, and the truth of the assertions of third parties respecting it, &c, &c.
On a motion for an injunction to restrain the alleged infringement of a patent, the Defendant insisted, first, on the invalidity of the patent; and, secondly, that he had not infringed it, and an action was directed. Afterwards, the Defendant pleaded in equity simply the want of novelty of the patent. This Court, on allowing the plea, gave the Plaintiff’ liberty to apply to modify the order made on the application for the injunction, so as to make it conformable to the issue tendered by the plea.
