The claimant appealed an order finding its patents for mechanisms for labelling CDs invalid for obviousness. Held: the judge had applied the correct tests for obviousness, and the view taken by the judge of the expert evidence was not open to challenge in the way suggested. The patent was invalid for obviousness, and the appeal … Continue reading Rocky Mountain Traders Limited and Hewlett Packard Gmbh; Westcoast Limited and Fellowes Manufacturing (UK) Limited: CA 20 Dec 2000
The court advised of the need for caution to avoid hindsight when looking for obviousness in a patent. Citations: [1972] RPC 346 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Rocky Mountain Traders Limited and Hewlett Packard Gmbh; Westcoast Limited and Fellowes Manufacturing (UK) Limited CA 20-Dec-2000 The claimant appealed an order finding its patents … Continue reading Technograph Printed Circuits Ltd v Mills and Rockley (Electronics) Ltd: 1972
Lord Diplock said: ‘The common law of trade marks before 1875 The use by manufacturers of distinctive marks upon goods which they had made is of very ancient origin, but legal recognition of trade marks as a species of incorporeal property was first accorded by the Court of Chancery in the first half of the … Continue reading General Electric Co v General Electric Co Ltd; GE TM; Re GE Trade Mark: HL 1972
The claimant’s product was made from drawings. The drawings were protected as copyright artistic works. They were reproduced in a three dimensional form by the claimant’s own products. Someone who copied the claimant’s products indirectly copied the . .
Mr Cooley was the managing director of the claimant. His duties included procuring business in the field of developing gas depots. The company had unsuccessful negotiations with the Eastern Gas Board for the development of four depots. However, the . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Both sides requested that the comptroller should decline to deal with a reference under section 72 in light of parallel proceedings in the Patents Court. The Hearing Officer concluded that it was clearly undesirable to have the same or largely similar issues litigated both before the comptroller and the court. He was satisfied that the … Continue reading Asphalt Re-Lay Ltd and NuPhalt Limited (Patent): IPO 4 Feb 2010
The parties came together in a limited partnership to develop property. The appeal was against a refusal to grant summary judgment on a claim that one party had been induced to enter the contract by a fraudulent misrepresentation. Held: In this case, the defendant knew of the unlawful activity, and had no arguable defence, and … Continue reading Criterion Properties Plc v Stratford UK Properties and others: CA 18 Dec 2002
The revenue appealed against refusal of its petition for the winding up of the company for non-payment of a VAT assessment. The company said that the assessment was disputed. The revenue said that the company had been run for the purpose of submitting false VAT Input tax claims, and suppressing Output tax invoices. Held: The … Continue reading Revenue and Customs v Rochdale Drinks Distributors Ltd: CA 13 Oct 2011
A patent which was applied for as a result of a breach of confidence may be capable of giving the victim of the breach the benefit of an interest in the patent. In the UK at least the basis of an entitlement claim must be a breach of the claimant’s right to the invention and … Continue reading Markem Corporation and Another v Zipher Ltd: CA 22 Mar 2005
Chubb sought to prevent the registration of a mark by the claimant arguing that its use would amount to passing off as against its own marks. Held: There was insufficient evidence for the hearing officer to have found that Chubb had maintained a sufficient residual reputation in goods bearing the mark to complain as to … Continue reading Minimax Gmbh and Co Kg v Chubb Fire Ltd: PatC 29 Jul 2008
The court was asked whether, for the purposes of establishing a company’s liability under the knowing receipt head of constructive trust, the knowledge of one of its directors can be treated as having been the knowledge of the company. Held: The company was fixed with the knowledge of its part-time chairman and a non-executive director, … Continue reading El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings Ltd: CA 2 Dec 1993
To demand rent may waive a right to forfeiture. Sachs J said: ‘When one looks at the authorities, it is, however, clear that a demand can operate as a waiver in the same way as an acceptance.’ Also the landlord’s own behaviour can be taken into account when deciding whether to grant relief against forfeiture. … Continue reading Segal Securities Limited v Thoseby: QBD 1963
There was a contract for the sale of Craven Cottage football stadium, conditional upon the grant of non-onerous planning permissions. It was claimed that the contract had been obtained by the defendant employee in breach of his fiduciary duties to another company of whom he was a director. The defendant said the claimant had agreed … Continue reading Crown Dilmun, Dilmun Investments Limited v Nicholas Sutton, Fulham River Projects Limited: ChD 23 Jan 2004
The claimant was a member of Parliament and an author. The defendant published a column which was said to give the impression that the claimant had written it. It was a parody. The claim was in passing off. Held: The first issue was whether a substantial number of readers had been misled. The deception must … Continue reading Alan Kenneth McKenzie Clark v Associated Newspapers Ltd: PatC 21 Jan 1998
The appellants resisted disclosure to the revenue of advice it had received. It claimed legal advice privilege (LAP), though the advice was from its accountants. Held: (Lords Sumption and Clarke dissenting) LAP applies to all communications passing between a client and its lawyers, acting in their professional capacity, in connection with the provision of legal … Continue reading Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another: SC 23 Jan 2013
The defendant had admitted copying B’s drawings and designs for the creation of a nebulizer. To assist its election on damages, B sought preparation of details of the sales including costs and sale prices. When B also sought statutory damages, M said that having omitted it from the statement of claim, it was too late … Continue reading Brugger v Medic-Aid Ltd: PatC 1996
Claims of infringement were made as to copyright works being various works about Scientology. Extracts had appeared in the defendant’s book which was critical of the cult. It was submitted by the plaintiff that the fair dealing section applied only to criticism of the work, not of the doctrine or philosophy underlying it. Held: The … Continue reading Hubbard v Vosper: CA 1971
The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they needed a licence for the purpose. Held: The members of PRCA required licences from the claimants in order lawfully to receive … Continue reading The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others: ChD 26 Nov 2010
The claimant had edited ancient music scores so as to be ready for performance for the defendant. He asserted a copyright. The defendants argued that the contribution was too little to create a copyright. Held: To succeed Dr Sawkins had to establish that each of his editions is an original musical work. The argument that … Continue reading Sawkins v Hyperion Records Limited: ChD 5 Jul 2004
The plaintiffs had applied for a product licence for a patented drug. To support its application, it supplied the authority with confidential information which the authority now sought to make use of the confidential information when considering later applications for licences for similar products. Held: The authority had a duty of public safety, and to … Continue reading In Re Smith Kline and French Laboratories Ltd: HL 9 Feb 1989
(New South Wales) The court considered the use by directors of their fiduciary power of allotment of shares for a different purpose than that for which it was granted, and so as to dilute the voting power of the majority shareholding of issued shares. Lord Wilberforce said: ‘Having ascertained, on a fair view, the nature … Continue reading Howard Smith Limited v Ampol Petroleum Limited: PC 14 Feb 1974
The court was asked whether advice given by an accountant could be protected against disclosure by legal professional privilege. The company had taken advice from its accountants, and objected to disclosure of that advice to the tax authorities under a notice issued under section 20 of the 1970 Act. Held: Legal professional privilege was not … Continue reading Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Others: CA 13 Oct 2010
The claimant had developed historical musical works for performance. They were published by the defendant, by means of recordings of a performance from the scores he had prepared – so called ‘performance editions’. The many hundreds of hours expended, involved transcription of the scores into modern notation and interpretation of the composers shorthand. The publisher … Continue reading Hyperion Records Ltd v Sawkins: CA 19 May 2005
How much new material for new copyright (Hong Kong) Toy building bricks were manufactured by Lego in accordance with engineering drawings made for that purpose. One issue was whether new drawings made since 1972, altering the original drawings in various minor respects but added new information addressed to the purchaser in the form of written … Continue reading Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc: PC 5 May 1988
Court of Appeal must follow Own Decisions The claimant was injured and received compensation. He then sought to recover again, alleging breach of statutory duty by his employers. Held: The Court of Appeal was in general bound to follow its own previous decisions. The court considered the circumstances in which it could depart from a … Continue reading Young v The Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd: CA 28 Jul 1944
The company had obtained legal advice but had taken it from their accountants. The Revenue sought its disclosure, and the company said that as legal advice it was protected by legal professional privilege. Held: The material was not protected. The privilege given under the Act by virtue of the Morgan Grenfell decision was limited to … Continue reading Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another: Admn 14 Oct 2009
The plaintiffs had been established as market leaders with their patented construction, had ample production capacity and stocks, but had never granted any licence under their patent. The patent was for a novel type of galvanised steel lintel, which the relevant claim described as including a rear support back plate ‘extending vertically’ from a horizontal … Continue reading Catnic Components Ltd and Another v Hill and Smith Ltd: HL 1982
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their patents. Held: Disclosure should be ordered. If someone, even innocently … Continue reading Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners: HL 26 Jun 1973
Degree of Novelty Required before patent grant The court set out the test for novelty required to be established before a patent could properly be granted: ‘To determine whether a patentee’s claim has been anticipated by an earlier publication it is necessary to compare the earlier publication with the patentee’s claim. The earlier publication must, … Continue reading General Tire and Rubber Company v Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company Ltd: CA 1971
The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had copied its house designs after a senior employee involved in creating the designs left and eventually came to work for the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the copying was flagrant allowing . .
The owners of copyright in drawings of ‘Popeye, the Sailor’ sued importers of ‘Popeye’ dolls and other toys. The defendants contended that the copyright in the original work had been lost by the operation of section 22 of the 1911 Act because the . .
A wall plaque was published before 1950. Its design was an original artistic work but was produced for the purpose of reproduction by an industrial process. It was not registered as an industrial design under the applicable designs legislation . .
Novelty was claimed in shape or configuration of the brassiere the subject of the registration. Held; Under the law of registered designs, the designer had to state in what respect he claimed novelty – was it shape, configuration pattern or . .
The design in question consisted of a drawing or picture of a nipple, such as was used for the purpose of lubricating the bearings of automobiles. It was submitted for the plaintiff that if a design had utility, it might still be registered under . .
The order at first instance was discharged ‘without prejudice to any question so that it cannot be used as a precedent’ . .
A drawing of a letter could be both the subject matter of copyright and protected under the Patents and Designs Act 1907. . .
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
References: [1963] 1 QB 887, [1963] 1 All ER 500 Coram: Sachs J Ratio: To demand rent may waive a right to forfeiture. Sachs J said: ‘When one looks at the authorities, it is, however, clear that a demand can operate as a waiver in the same way as an acceptance.’ Also the landlord’s own … Continue reading Segal Securities Limited v Thoseby: 1963
