Appeal against refusal of patent – invention related to a scheme, rule, or method, for doing business and/or a mathematical method – financial derivatives. Judges: Mann J Citations: [2006] EWHC 1676 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents Act 1977 1(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Intellectual Property Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263670
The court upheld the rejection of a patent application with regard to a computer program. Judges: Mann J Citations: [2006] EWHC 705 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents Act 1977 77 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Blacklight Power Inc v The Comptroller-General of Patents PatC 18-Nov-2008 The applicant appealed against the refusal of … Continue reading Macrossan v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks 2005: ChD 3 Apr 2006
Appeal from refusal of patent under section 1(2)(c) Judges: Mann J Citations: [2006] EWHC 705 (Pat) Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents Act 1977 97 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Intellectual Property Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.380358
These appeals are concerned with the validity and infringement of a patent concerning tadalafil. Lewison, Kitchin, Floyd LJJ [2017] EWCA Civ 1671, 159 BMLR 108 Bailii England and Wales Cited by: At CA – Actavis Group Ptc EHF and Others v Icos Corporation and Another SC 27-Mar-2019 The court considered: ‘the application of the test … Continue reading Actavis Group Ptc EHF and Another v Teva UK Ltd and Others: CA 1 Nov 2017
The issue raised on this appeal and cross-appeal is whether three products manufactured by Actavis would infringe a patent whose proprietor is Lilly, namely European Patent (UK) No 1 313 508, and its corresponding designations in France, Italy and Spain. Held: Eli Lilly’s appeal succeeded. The Actavis products directly infringed the respondent’s patents. The Court … Continue reading Eli Lilly v Actavis UK Ltd and Others: SC 12 Jul 2017
cw Inter Partes Decisions – Patents – The reference under section 8(1) concerning entitlement to the application was treated as unopposed following the failure of the applicant for the patent to provide a counter-statement. The application was due to be, but had not actually been, treated as withdrawn for failure to file an abstract and … Continue reading Marine Contractors Limited v Barnes: PO 25 Apr 2002
cw Inter Partes Decisions – Patents – The reference under section 8(1) concerning entitlement to the application was treated as unopposed following the failure of the applicant for the patent to provide a . .
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
The defendant firm of solicitors had acted for a Danish Research Institute. They wrote to several parties regarding a patent. B initiated a threat action. IBB appealed against an order striking out their defence, saying that the issue of whether what they said amounted to a threat was a question of fact to be decided … Continue reading Brain v Ingledew Brown Benson and Garrett and Another: CA 1996
The threats provisions may have the effect of making litigation more rather than less likely. The exclusion in the subsection is limited in its scope. It does not give rise to a general entitlement to threaten manufacturers or importers or users. In particular, if a trader both manufactures and sells products and a patentee threatens … Continue reading Cavity Trays Ltd v RMC Panels Products Ltd: CA 1996
The defendants wanted to defend their patent against a possible infringement. There were negotiations, following which the defendants wrote claiming damages or licence fees. The claimant asserted that the letter constituted a threat. The defendant argued justification. Held: The court has to determine in all the circumstances not only whether a threat was made but … Continue reading Cintec International Ltd v John Humphries Parkes (T/A Dell Explosives) and Another: ChD 2 Oct 2003
The exclusion provided in section 70(4) of the 1977 Act is of limited scope. Whatever the legislative intention, it does not give rise to a general entitlement to threaten manufacturers or importers or users. In particular, if a trader both manufactures and sells products and a patentee threatens him with infringement proceedings in respect of … Continue reading Cavity Trays Ltd v RMC Panel Products Ltd: CA 2 Jan 1996
Representatives of the Defendant company were said to have asserted, during an expressly ‘without prejudice’ meeting, that the plaintiff’s marketing of its product infringed the Defendant’s patent and threatened to bring an action for infringement. The plaintiff, relying on the statements made at the meeting, brought proceedings against the Defendant under section 70 of the … Continue reading Unilever Plc v The Procter and Gamble Company: PatC 24 Feb 1999
A threats of an infringement claim regarding acts of the addressee between the Patent application being filed and the grant of the patent are actionable under the threat action procedure. Citations: Ind Summary 18-Apr-1995 Statutes: Patents Act 1977 70(1) 70(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal From – Brain v Ingledew Brown Benson and … Continue reading Brain v Ingledew Brown Benson and Garrett and Another: ChD 18 Apr 1995
The parties each made cable mechanisms for cars. There had been a patent dispute in Germany resulting in a finding of infringement, which finding was subject to appeal. A letter was sent in England referring to the German decision, stating that the company intended to enforce its rights. Held: In considering whether it was arguable … Continue reading Bowden Controls Ltd v Acco Cable Controls Ltd: ChD 1990
The defendant’s negotiators had asserted in an expressly ‘without prejudice’ meeting, that the plaintiff was infringing its patent and they threatened to bring an action for infringement. The plaintiff sought to bring a threat action under section 70 relying on the statements. The judge held the statement inadmissible. Held: The plaintiff’s appeal failed. Where there … Continue reading Unilever plc v Procter and Gamble Company: CA 4 Nov 1999
. .
The defendant had charged his property to the Halifax. Abbey supplied funds to secure its discharge, but its own charge was not registered. It sought to take advantage of the Halifax’s charge which had still not been removed. Held: A mortgagee whose loan is used to repay another charged debt is subrogated to that debt, … Continue reading Boscawen and Others v Bajwa and Others; Abbey National Plc v Boscawen and Others: CA 10 Apr 1995
Patent action in which the claimant seeks a declaration of non-infringement (‘DNI’) against the patentee, the defendant (BOS) under section 71 of the Patents Act 1977. The subject matter of the EU patent (EP 3266631 B1) is part of a system of blinds installed in car windows. Judges: Sir Anthony Mann Citations: [2022] EWHC 2823 … Continue reading Lisa Draxlmaier Gmbh v Bos Gmbh and Co Kg: PatC 8 Nov 2022
The claimants sought to amend their claim which had previously been on the basis of a joint ownership, to one of sole ownership. Held: The application for the amendment being made more han two years after the grant, the amendment could not be allowed. s.37(5) bars the making of a new claim out of time. … Continue reading Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd v Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and others: CA 31 Jul 2006
IPO The invention relates to a process control safety system and in particular to a method and apparatus for generating a script for use in writing data in a process control safety system. The claims address the interface provided to the user when changes to safety systems are required. A script is automatically generated as … Continue reading Fisher-Rosemount Systems Inc (Patent): IPO 10 Sep 2009
IPO Just before the parties were due to be heard in a dispute over ownership of an application under the Patent Co-operation Treaty, the issue was raised of the validity of an assignment which appeared to cover all rights to the inventive matter contained in the application. As this was a point of central importance … Continue reading Azam and Livesey (Patent): IPO 22 Dec 2010
(Patent) An uncontested application was filed by Smart Holograms Limited under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007 and section 13(3) of the Patents Act 1977. It was found that Roger Bradley Millington should be mentioned as sole inventor in relation to any patent granted for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning … Continue reading Smart Holograms Limited,Millington, Lowe, Davidson, Blyth, Kabilan and Marshall: IPO 27 Nov 2008
IPO The invention concerns the ranking of Internet search results in the context of mobile phone access to Internet content with content providers paying to improve their position in the ranking of search results. The invention takes into account the quantity of data to be transmitted, the cost of transmission and the payment offered by … Continue reading Cvon Innovations Ltd (Patent): IPO 28 Jul 2008
IPO An uncontested application was filed by ABB Research Ltd under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Sean Keeping, Roger Arnold, Martin Ashford and Steve Eeles should also be mentioned as joint inventors in any patent granted for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning … Continue reading Abb Research Ltd, Sean Keeping, Roger Arnold, Martin Ashford, Steve Eeles and Others (Patent): IPO 18 Jul 2008
IPO The invention provided, in a brokerage system which allowed a user to obtain digital content from third party providers via a networked system, a means to store information about the functionality and capability of one or more devices held by the user and supply the information to the provider so that the provider could … Continue reading ATT Knowledge Ventures, LP (Patent): IPO 2 Jul 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/186/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/187/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/188/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/185/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/184/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/183/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was … Continue reading Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/189/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008
IPO Mr. Farr applied under section 37 of the Patents Act 1977 to be named proprietor/inventor of EP 1268313. The proprietors, Orbis, responded by requesting summary dismissal of Mr. Farr’s claim on the grounds that he had no reasonable chance of success and that the reference was made out of time under section 37(5) of … Continue reading Kenneth Farr; Orbis Corporation (Patent): IPO 11 Jun 2008
IPO The invention related to a gaming apparatus and method in which 2D image data was converted into a 3D video image and displayed on a non-planar 3D screen. The examiner had objected that the contribution of the invention was excluded under the above categories, but (although it was not apparent from the specification as … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/149/08: IPO 23 May 2008
IPO As a result of an uncontested application filed under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 by MSP Corporation, the relevant provision now being rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007, it was found that Nicholas C Miller should also be named as a joint inventor in the published patent application and granted patent … Continue reading MSP Corporation, Nicholas C Miller, Virgil A Marple, Daryl L Roberts and Benjamin Y H Liu (Patent): IPO 22 May 2008
IPO (Patent) This decision is concerned with claims to computer programs for carrying out patentable methods; sometimes called ‘program on a carrier’ claims. For many years, such claims have been allowed under the Patents Act. However, following the Aerotel and Macrossan case in the Court of Appeal, the Office issued a practice notice which gave … Continue reading Astron Clinica Limited, Cyan Holdings Plc Surfkitchen Inc, Inrotis Technologies Limited, Software 2000 Ltd: IPO 4 Jul 2007
It was known for casinos to issue their own identification cards for use by players of gaming machines, but the invention allowed information to be read from a pre-existing card such as a driver’s licence or credit card and used, without decrypting it, to identify whether the player had an account. The claims related to … Continue reading Acres Gaming Incorporated (Patent): IPO 11 Jul 2007
IPO The application is concerned with a method of operating gaming machines in which players are offered games in which they can exercise a level of skill, strategy or risk. A proportion of the award (whether won or lost) from this play is fed into a steadily increasing jackpot, and the player is then able … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/167/07: IPO 13 Jun 2007
The hearing officer had deferred a decision on whether to order the claimant to give security for costs in revocation proceedings (see O/345/06) in order to allow either party to request a written opinion. The claimant so requested and the proceedings were stayed to await the opinion. This found that all claims lacked novelty over … Continue reading Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc (Patent): IPO 24 May 2007
IPO This application relates to an electronic gaming machine such as a ‘slot machine’ wherein players begin the game by pulling an arm or pushing a button which in turn rotates a series of reels or an equivalent video representation thereof, if when the reels stop, a winning arrangement of symbols is displayed, the player … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/097/07: IPO 5 Apr 2007
IPO Excluded fields (refused) – In a gaming machine, different results were classified into sets producing the same outcome, all results producing the same outcome being in the same set; the results were numbered and stored in a memory with the outcomes; and a processor randomly selected one of the outcomes and one of the … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/077/07: IPO 15 Mar 2007
IPO Added subject matter, Excluded fields (refused) – The invention related to a trajectory-based game of chance for implementation on a video gaming machine. The claim related to a gaming machine but in the light of Aerotel/Macrossan [2006] EWCA Civ 1371 it was agreed that the contribution was a data structure including a probability distribution … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/054/07: IPO 22 Feb 2007
IPO The claims were directed to a hydrophobic, pyrogenically produced silica having a tamped density of 55-200 g/l, hydrophobised by reaction with a halogen-free silane or siloxane and compacted by a roller compactor or belt filter press. In an oral decision, the hearing officer held that the claims lacked inventive step in the light of … Continue reading Degussa-Huls Ag (Patent): IPO 18 Jun 2004
IPO The invention relates to a computerised system for trading stocks, shares, currencies and the like. Offers of assets for sale and bids to buy were displayed on each trader’s workstation so that they were able to observe and participate in the market. Each bid or offer made could comprise shown and hidden portions, the … Continue reading CFPH, LLC (Patent): IPO 25 May 2004
OIP The invention concerns a computer-based system for a form of online betting in which the participants effectively bet against each other rather than a bookmaker. It is based on the use of ‘coupons’ which are created and traded in the system. A coupon is defined as having a set value if some future event … Continue reading Eventsmarket Pty Ltd (Patent): IPO 26 Mar 2004
Burden of proof, Entitlement, Inventorship, Jurisdiction, Orders – One of the co-applicants for the PCT application (Mr Khemka) referred questions of inventorship and entitlement on forty applications derived from the PCT application. There was no domestic GB application. The hearing officer found that he did not have jurisdiction under sections 8 and 37 (section 9 … Continue reading Sheel Khemka v Nana-Akoto Osei (Patent): IPO 19 Sep 2003
As a result of an uncontested application filed under section 13(1) by Michael Jones and Ian Henderson, it was found that they should be mentioned as joint inventors in the granted patent for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning them as joint inventors be prepared for the granted patent for the invention. … Continue reading Jones and Henderson v Protensive Limited (Patent) O-207-03: IPO 17 Jul 2003
IPO The application relates to a method for facilitating retrieval of image data from a database and how a user interacts with the database. The user is interrogated as to attributes of the image data and the system selects images based on metadata already stored with the image, there being facility to update that metadata … Continue reading Hewlett-Packard Company (Patent): IPO 12 Jun 2006
ICO The application related to a networked gaming system which changed the game content and behaviour based on recorded data about players, thus allowing a casino operator to tailor the experience to an individual. Using the approach in CFPH LLP’s Appn [2005] EWHC 1589, it was not disputed that any advance lay in the feedback … Continue reading Acres Gaming Incorporated (Patent): IPO 3 May 2006
IPO In section 27 opposition proceedings, the opponent (Laird Security Hardware Limited) argued that the application to amend should be refused on the grounds that it contravenes section 76 in that it introduces additional matter; that it contravenes section 14 in that the claims as amended are not clear; and that it does not rectify … Continue reading Archibald Kenrick Sons Limited v Laird Security Hardware Limited: IPO 15 Mar 2006
An uncontested application was filed by Power-Sprays Limited, originally under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 though the application was subsequently taken as filed under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Glyn Andrew Bosley should also be mentioned as a joint inventor in any patent granted … Continue reading Power-Sprays Limited, Ian G White and Glyn Andrew Bosley (Patent): IPO 18 Jun 2008
The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through the giving of the ‘wrongful undertakings’ Held: The joined party, who had not itself … Continue reading Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006
Proceedings had been brought by a third party in which the patent had been revoked. The Defendant in the first proceedings now sought release from an enquiry as to damages after being found, before the revocation, to have infringed the patent. Held: (Lord Justice Neuberger dissenting) The defendant was bound by the order for an … Continue reading Coflexip S A and Another v Stolt Offshore Ms Ltd and others: CA 27 Feb 2004
The judge urged that the Convention should be incorporated into English law without rephrasing difficult clauses: ‘it helps no-one for the Parliamentary draftsman to re-write matter in a treaty or convention (or EU directive for that matter) which is to be implemented in the United Kingdom. If the language of the basic document is obscure … Continue reading Beloit Technologies Inc and Another v Valmet Paper Machinery Inc and Another: ChD 12 May 1995
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 court rejected an application for a patent for, inter alia, a ‘data processing system for making a trading market in at least one security in which the system proprietor is acting as principal’. Held: Falconer J said: ‘In my judgment, where an invention for which a patent is sought involves any of the matters … Continue reading Merrill Lynch’s Application: ChD 1988
Jacobs J said: ‘I do not think it is right to divide up the claim for an invention which consists of a combination of elements and then to seek to identify who contributed which element. I think the inquiry is more fundamental than that. One must seek to identify who in substance made the combination. … Continue reading Henry Brothers (Magherafelt) Ltd v Ministry of Defence Northern Ireland Office: ChD 1997
The claimant appealed from refusal of statutory compensation under the 1977 Act. He had invented a form of pump which was used by his employers, the respondents in the management of diabetes management. Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘the correct approach to the application of section 40 and the one that does least violence to its … Continue reading Shanks v Unilever Plc and Others: SC 23 Oct 2019
The claimant said that the defendant had, through its members visiting their premises, breached the licence under which they entered, by taking photographs and distributing them on the internet, and in so doing also infringing the performance rights of the claimant. Held: On breach of confidence, the parties had an arguable cases on each side, … Continue reading Heythrop Zoological Gardens Ltd (T/A Amazing Animals) and Another v Captive Animals Protection Society: ChD 20 May 2016
The original inventor obtained a patent for a brake fluid protection system. A loan was raised against the patent, assigning also the future developments of the idea. The loan was called in, and then assigned to the defenders, who took the idea forward obtaining further patents. The pursuer asserted infringement. Held: The loan transferred all … Continue reading Buchanan v Alba Diagnostics Limited: HL 5 Feb 2004
The respondents had applied for and obtained an order to revoke the appellant’s patent of a stent for obvousness. Though the parties had settled, the public law element required the intervention of the Comptroller General. The House was asked about how to identify the concept embodied in the invention which may constitute the ‘inventive step’ … Continue reading Conor Medsystems Inc v Angiotech Pharmaceuticals Inc and others: HL 9 Jul 2008
Parties had together applied to register a trade mark. Later one applied and the other opposed, and application. At various times they had been represented by trade mark agents and solicitors. Protection against discovery was now sought as to communications with the trade mark agents. Held: Nourse J refused to extend the protection of legal … Continue reading Dormeuil Trade Mark: ChD 1983
In a threat action for trade mark infringement, the plaintiff had only supplied services. The defendant made a general threat without limiting it to proceedings in respect of goods or services. The defendant argued that the threat would be understood as relating only to services, as that is all the plaintiff provided. Held: Section 70 … Continue reading Prince PLC v Prince Sports Group Inc: ChD 1998
IPO The claimant launched entitlement proceedings in respect of four withdrawn and unpublished patent applications, arguing that the defendant had made the inventions during the course of his duties whilst employed by the claimant. The claimant argued that the defendant was a director of Cerise Innovation at the time when the inventions were made and … Continue reading Cerise Innovation Technology Ltd vAbdulhayoglu (Patent) O/067/00: IPO 23 Feb 2000
IPO Genentech Inc, the proprietors of Patent Number EP(UK) 1 187 632 B1, entitled ‘Treatment with Anti-ErbB2 Antibodies’, granted on 3 December 2008, gave notice on 16 January 2014 of an offer to surrender this patent under Section 29 of the Act. At this time, the patent was also the subject of revocation proceedings in … Continue reading Genentech Inc (Patent): IPO 11 Aug 2014
IPO An uncontested decision was filed by La Cotiere Grand-Large under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007 and section 13(3) of the Patents Act 1977. It was found that Eric Glorieux should be mentioned as the sole inventor in relation to the granted EP(UK) patent and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him as … Continue reading La Cotiere Grand Large, Manuel Brandenberg and Eric Glorieux (Patent): IPO 6 Feb 2014
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
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 invention in this case was an improved ‘data processing system for making a trading market in at least one security in which the system proprietor is acting as principal.’ Held: More than one exclusion can be in play in relation to the same application. Inventive excluded matter cannot count as a technical advance. Fox … Continue reading Merrill Lynch’s Application: CA 1989
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside. Held: Investors having once assigned their causes of action to the ICS, could not later … Continue reading Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997
The company sought to recover damages from a director who had acted dishonestly, by concealing a financial interest in a different company which had made loans to the claimant company. He replied that the claim was out of time. At first instance the first defendant had been found dishonest through non-disclosure, and that section 21 … Continue reading DEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3): CA 28 Jul 2003
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
Following its earlier main judgment in the case, the court made use of the CPR to award costs on an appeal. The overall result had been that the patent was found to be valid but not infringed. There had been huge costs. Smithkline sought costs on an indemnity basis, saying the court had certified the … Continue reading Smithkline Beecham Plc and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others: CA 16 Dec 2004
Contractor and Client Copyrights The plaintiff had contributed a design for a system of classifying and selecting tracks to be played on a radio station. He did so under a consultancy contract. Held: A Joint authorship claim required that the contributor had made some direct contribution to the words appearing in the eventual published item. … Continue reading Robin Ray v Classic FM Plc: PatC 18 Mar 1998
The applicant attempted to patent the use of two known pharmaceuticals to treat the folowing: ‘battle fatigue, combat stress reaction, post-traumatic stress disorder in civilian and military emergency situations, neurological symptoms associated . .
The bank had entered into a master trading agreement with a trader under which the trader bought motor vehicles as agent for the bank for resale. The vehicles belonged to the bank. The defendant bought all the trader’s vehicles. The defendant now . .
The parties disputed whether there had been an infringement of the claimant’s patent in respect for ‘intermediate bulk containers’ designed for the safe transport of liquids in bulk. They were a cage holding a plastic bottle. The defendant had a . .
The court should incline towards patentability in the case of computer programs: ‘I am anxious that these exclusions are not given too wide a scope. All modern industry depends upon programmed computers, and one must be astute not to defeat patents . .