Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Comptroller-General of Patents Designs and Trademarks ex parte Ash and Lacey Building Products Ltd: 2002

Revocation was sought on the ground that the patent was invalid because of anticipation by prior publication. The court considered its powers under section 77 in the context of such a revocation application: ‘ . . the power to revoke arises in circumstances where there is a lis between the patentee and the applicant. The … Continue reading Regina v Comptroller-General of Patents Designs and Trademarks ex parte Ash and Lacey Building Products Ltd: 2002

Actavis Group Ptc EHF and Another v Teva UK Ltd and Others: CA 1 Nov 2017

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

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 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 The application was due to be, but had not actually been, treated as withdrawn for failure to file an abstract and … Continue reading Marine Contractors Limited v Barnes: PO 25 Apr 2002

Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marks: CA 13 Nov 2014

The inventor company appealed against rejection of its application for a patent for a computer program. Held: The appeal failed: ‘on the facts found by the Hearing Officer, the invention is no more than the computerisation of a process which could already be done without a computer. It has no relevant technical effect. Accordingly, the … Continue reading Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marks: CA 13 Nov 2014

Acts

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

Point Solutions Ltd v Focus Business Solutions Ltd and Another: ChD 16 Dec 2005

It was claimed that the defendant’s computer software infringed the copyright in software owned by the claimant. A declaration was sought beacause of allegations that assertions about infringement had been made to third parties. Held: The declaration was refused. There was no explicit provision in copyright law for a declaration of non-infringement as was available … Continue reading Point Solutions Ltd v Focus Business Solutions Ltd and Another: ChD 16 Dec 2005

Lisa Draxlmaier Gmbh v Bos Gmbh and Co Kg: PatC 8 Nov 2022

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

Stena Rederi Aktiebolag and Another v Irish Ferries Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2003

A ferry plied its way between Dublin and Holyhead, coming into English territorial waters three or four times a day, and for up to three hours on each occasion. The claimants asserted that the construction of the hull infringed its patent. Held: The Act specifically excluded liability where an infringing ship or other item came … Continue reading Stena Rederi Aktiebolag and Another v Irish Ferries Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2003

Lantana Ltd (Patent): IPO 4 Feb 2013

IPO The application relates to retrieving data from a remote computer using e-mail. A local computer sends a first e-mail containing machine-readable retrieval criteria and the remote computer responds with an e-mail containing the requested data. The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel/Macrossan test and decided that the contribution made by the invention fell solely within … Continue reading Lantana Ltd (Patent): IPO 4 Feb 2013

Alaa Hussein Al-Darraji (Patent): IPO 19 Dec 2012

Sufficiency, Support – The invention appears to relate to the use of certain compounds in nuclear imaging for discovering the cause of cancer. The Hearing Officer decided that the claimed invention was not disclosed in a manner that was clear and complete enough for it to be performed by a skilled person, and was not … Continue reading Alaa Hussein Al-Darraji (Patent): IPO 19 Dec 2012

Liffe Administration and Management v Pinkava and Another: CA 15 Mar 2007

The employee had patented in the US a trading system he invented whilst employed by the defendant, who now sought ownership. He appealed a finding that the inventions had been made during the normal course of his employment. The employment contract provided: ‘All trade secrets, inventions, written documents, and other confidential information developed or created … Continue reading Liffe Administration and Management v Pinkava and Another: CA 15 Mar 2007

Russell Taylor v AQ Plc (Patent): IPO 1 May 2012

Entitlement – This was an uncontested entitlement action, the registered proprietor of the patent application having been dissolved. The Hearing Officer accepted that, on the balance of probabilities, the matter in the patent application belonged to the claimant. As the application was refused nearly three years ago, the Hearing Officer could not make an order … Continue reading Russell Taylor v AQ Plc (Patent): IPO 1 May 2012

Vmware Inc (Patent): IPO 25 Apr 2012

IPO Inventive step – The application is concerned with installing software on a computer system and resolving any dependencies that arise by making copies of dependant resources. The examiner’s inventive step objection was based on two sets of citations, the first set showing that it is known to copy shared resources and the second set … Continue reading Vmware Inc (Patent): IPO 25 Apr 2012

Compurants Ltd (Patent) O/187/12: IPO 4 May 2012

IPO Excluded fields (refused), Inventive step – The invention relates to a computer-controlled system for ordering food and/or drink in a restaurant in which a projector mounted above the dining table is used to project plate shaped images of the actual food which can be ordered onto the surface of the table where customers are … Continue reading Compurants Ltd (Patent) O/187/12: IPO 4 May 2012

Nats (En Route) Plc, Brian Janes, Stephen James Pember and Alison Laura Udal Roberts (Patent): IPO 13 Oct 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by NATS (EN ROUTE) PLC originally under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 though the application was subsequently taken as filed under rule 10(2) of the Patent Rules 2007. The applicants also filed an uncontested application under section 13(3). It was found that Stephen James Pember and Alison … Continue reading Nats (En Route) Plc, Brian Janes, Stephen James Pember and Alison Laura Udal Roberts (Patent): IPO 13 Oct 2008

Norman Paterson and Nicholas Jones (Patent): IPO 30 Sep 2008

IPO The application related to a device for generating electricity by pumping water to an impeller attached to a generator. The hearing officer upheld the examiner’s objection that the invention operated in a manner contrary to well-established physical laws and was therefore neither capable of industrial application nor sufficiently disclosed. Citations: [2008] UKIntelP o26608 Links: … Continue reading Norman Paterson and Nicholas Jones (Patent): IPO 30 Sep 2008

World Properties Inc, Sankar K Paul, Luis D Borges and Allen F Horn Iii, Murali Sethumadhavan, Richard T Traskos and Michael E St Lawrence (Patent): IPO 7 Jul 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by Sankar K. Paul, Luis D. Borges and Allen F. Horn III, 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 Sankar K. Paul, Luis D. … Continue reading World Properties Inc, Sankar K Paul, Luis D Borges and Allen F Horn Iii, Murali Sethumadhavan, Richard T Traskos and Michael E St Lawrence (Patent): IPO 7 Jul 2008

Msp Corporation, Nicholas C Miller, Virgil A Marple, Daryl L Roberts and Benjamin Y H Liu (Patent): IPO 16 Jul 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by MSP Corporation, 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 Nicholas C Miller should also be mentioned as a joint inventor in the published … Continue reading Msp Corporation, Nicholas C Miller, Virgil A Marple, Daryl L Roberts and Benjamin Y H Liu (Patent): IPO 16 Jul 2008

ATT Knowledge Ventures, LP (Patent): IPO 2 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

CFPH LLC (Patent): IPO 10 Aug 2007

IPO In apparatus for electronic trading a spreadsheet application calculated a series of trading commands from incoming market data and stored them in a queue to be sent at predetermined intervals to an electronic trading system (ETS); since the commands might not be synchronised with market conditions by the time they were transmitted they were … Continue reading CFPH LLC (Patent): IPO 10 Aug 2007

IGT (Patent) O/097/07: IPO 5 Apr 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

IGT (Patent) O/077/07: IPO 15 Mar 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

IGT (Patent) O/054/07: IPO 22 Feb 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

M-Systems Flask Disk Pioneers Ltd and Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Patent): IPO 8 Nov 2006

IPO The patent in suit relates to a portable data storage device which can be connected to the USB port of a computer. The Claimant (M-Systems) sought revocation of the patent on the grounds that the patent as granted included matter extending beyond that originally disclosed, was not novel or did not involve an inventive … Continue reading M-Systems Flask Disk Pioneers Ltd and Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Patent): IPO 8 Nov 2006

Archibald Kenrick Sons Limited v Laird Security Hardware Limited: IPO 15 Mar 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

Chan v Jeffcoat (Patent): IPO 20 Jun 2001

IPO The patent concerned a non-woven fabric used primarily for wound dressing. The parties had discussed such a wound dressing in 1993, and in 1994 a company was formed to carry on the business of development and production of wound dressings, with the parties as shareholders. The defendant was managing director and had approached a … Continue reading Chan v Jeffcoat (Patent): IPO 20 Jun 2001

Amit Jain v Asahi (Patent): IPO 10 Apr 2001

IPO As a result of an uncontested application filed under section 13(1) by Amit Jain, it was found that Amit Jain should be mentioned as a joint inventor in any patent granted for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him as a joint inventor be prepared for the published patent application. Judges: … Continue reading Amit Jain v Asahi (Patent): IPO 10 Apr 2001

Beertech UK Limited, Jolley, Comerford and Patel (Patent): IPO 26 Nov 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by Beertech UK 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 Patent Rules 2007. An uncontested application was also filed by Beertech UK Limited under section 13(3). It was found that Narendra Patel should … Continue reading Beertech UK Limited, Jolley, Comerford and Patel (Patent): IPO 26 Nov 2008

Cappellini and Bloomberg, Re: PatC 13 Mar 2007

The applicants appealed rejection of their applications for patents. The comptroller-general had said that patents were in respect of computer programs excluded from registration. Held: The appeals failed. There was no relevant technical effect in merely moving vehicles and their cargos around according to a routing algorithm. Judges: Pumfrey J Citations: [2007] EWHC 476 (Pat) … Continue reading Cappellini and Bloomberg, Re: PatC 13 Mar 2007

Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006

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

Wang Laboratories Inc’s Application: ChD 1990

The applicant sought to patent an expert system embodied in a computer program for storing information in a way which allowed particular access. Held: ‘Before turning to the claims, I must deal with a submission of Mr Burkill, who appeared for the applicant. He submitted that the words ‘a scheme, rule or method for performing … Continue reading Wang Laboratories Inc’s Application: ChD 1990

Maudrich, Winkler, Singer, Lang, Fukarek, Mekra Lang Gmbh Co Kg and Leybold Optics Dresden Gmb (Patent): IPO 22 Dec 2010

IPO An uncontested application was filed by Maudrich, Winkler, Singer, Lang and Fukarek. As a result, it was found that Maudrich and Winkler should be mentioned as joint inventors in the granted patent for the invention along with the currently named inventors, Singer, Lang and Fukarek. It was also directed that an addendum slip mentioning … Continue reading Maudrich, Winkler, Singer, Lang, Fukarek, Mekra Lang Gmbh Co Kg and Leybold Optics Dresden Gmb (Patent): IPO 22 Dec 2010

Apotex Europe Ltd and others v Beecham Group Plc and Another: Patc 6 Jun 2003

Application by Apotex, to have the trial of an application for declarations of non-infringement heard at the same time as the trial of two other proceedings. Citations: [2003] EWHC 1395 (Pat) Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents At 1977 71 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Smithkline Beecham Plc, Glaxosmithkline UK Limited v Apotex Europe … Continue reading Apotex Europe Ltd and others v Beecham Group Plc and Another: Patc 6 Jun 2003

Synthon Bv v Smithkline Beecham Plc: HL 20 Oct 2005

Synthon filed an international application for a patent. Before it was published, SB filed a similar application in the UK patents registry. Synthon had applied for the UK patent granted to SB to be revoked. Jacob J had found that the reader of the application, seeking to crystallise PMS, would be able to overcome any … Continue reading Synthon Bv v Smithkline Beecham Plc: HL 20 Oct 2005

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd: SC 3 Jul 2013

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding 49,000,000 pounds for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had retrospectively amended it so as to remove with effect from the date of grant … Continue reading Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd: SC 3 Jul 2013

Apple Inc (Patent): IPO 15 Mar 2016

IPO The invention related to linking a software application that is pre-installed on a client device with a user account, thereby enabling certain acts to be carried out in relation to that application such as updating or reinstalling the application, or installing the application on another client device associated with the user account. A check … Continue reading Apple Inc (Patent): IPO 15 Mar 2016

Woolard, Re A Patent Application: PatC 12 Apr 2002

The question was what was meant by ‘application’ in section 2(3): the request, or the document. It was crucial, because if it meant the document it would have counted as prior art, and would have been novelty-destroying; but if it meant the request, it would not have done because the request had been withdrawn and … Continue reading Woolard, Re A Patent Application: PatC 12 Apr 2002

Sustainable Energy and Heating Systems Ltd (Patent): IPO 19 Aug 2014

IPO The application relates to a metering system to measure usage of renewable energy produced by a privately owned micro-generating unit. The micro-generating unit is part of a larger commercial installation which operates on the basis of ‘sharecropping’, where private users are allocated amounts of renewable energy based upon their investment into the scheme. The … Continue reading Sustainable Energy and Heating Systems Ltd (Patent): IPO 19 Aug 2014

Samsung Electronics Co Ltd (Patent): IPO 17 Dec 2014

Excluded fields (refused) – The invention related to providing a personalized advertising service through portable terminals such as mobile phones and Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs). In the invention, if a particular user wishes a personalized advertisement to be delivered to other users or group members an advertising server can provide the personalized advertisement based on … Continue reading Samsung Electronics Co Ltd (Patent): IPO 17 Dec 2014

Michael Oluwaseun Bamidele (Patent): IPO 11 Nov 2014

IPO The invention relates to an electronic book reading system, for accessing and reading digital content via a hand-held device. Data is transmitted wirelessly from the device to a lens system, in the form of glasses worn by the user or other lenses. The lens system reproduces content for the user in the form of … Continue reading Michael Oluwaseun Bamidele (Patent): IPO 11 Nov 2014

Senergy Holdings Limited (Patent): IPO 4 Feb 2015

IPO The application relates to a method of computationally modelling production from a subterranean region with reference to a wellbore and surrounding formation, such as may be encountered in oil and gas exploration and production. The modelling typically provides simulations which predict the flow of oil, water and/or gas flow from a formation, using a … Continue reading Senergy Holdings Limited (Patent): IPO 4 Feb 2015

I2 Technologies US, Inc (Patent) O-417-10: IPO 1 Dec 2010

IPO The methods, systems and computer programs described in the application are concerned with the management of a supply chain and particularly with controlling access of trading partners in the supply chain to particular stages or ‘states’ of the supply chain, in particular the trading partner can view the transaction in a given state, the … Continue reading I2 Technologies US, Inc (Patent) O-417-10: IPO 1 Dec 2010

Dynex Technologies, Inc, Bunce, Fusellier and Gaillard (Patent): IPO 26 Jun 2014

IPO Inventorship – An uncontested application was filed by Patrick Gaillard under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Patrick Gaillard should be mentioned as a joint inventor along with Adrian Bunce and Andrew Fusellier in the published patent application and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him … Continue reading Dynex Technologies, Inc, Bunce, Fusellier and Gaillard (Patent): IPO 26 Jun 2014

EV Offshore Limited, Thursby, Peck and Gibson-Ford (Patent): IPO 10 Jun 2014

IPO Inventorship – An uncontested application was filed by the proprietor E.V. Offshore Limited under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Matthew Gibson-Ford should be mentioned as a joint inventor along with Jonathan Thursby and Shaun Peck in the published patent application and granted patent for the … Continue reading EV Offshore Limited, Thursby, Peck and Gibson-Ford (Patent): IPO 10 Jun 2014

Brugger v Medic-Aid Ltd (No 2): ChD 1996

B alleged infringement by M of its patented nebulizer. M replied saying that the claims failed for obviousness. Features of the nebulizer were admittedly old and well known, but the claimant asserted a new mechanism which reduced the size of the droplets, increasing its efficiency. Held: The patent was invalid for obviousness. Laddie J set … Continue reading Brugger v Medic-Aid Ltd (No 2): ChD 1996

Dr Harry Nduka (Patent)O/132/14: IPO 20 Mar 2014

IPO The invention related to a device for controlling incontinence using a bladder pressure sensor and a muscle stimulator. A previous decision relating to this case was appealed by the applicant. The subsequent judgment required the applicant to file suitable amendments to address clarity and support. The application was remitted back to the examiner for … Continue reading Dr Harry Nduka (Patent)O/132/14: IPO 20 Mar 2014

La Cotiere Grand Large, Manuel Brandenberg and Eric Glorieux (Patent): IPO 6 Feb 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

Neath and Neath v Neath: IPO 12 Sep 2013

Patent – Decline to deal, Entitlement – These proceedings relate to the issue of entitlement and in particular a reference under sections 12 and 37 of the Patents Act 1977 in respect of GB2459912 and WO2009/136150. The matter appeared to have been resolved by agreement following mediation. However, there still appeared to be a number … Continue reading Neath and Neath v Neath: IPO 12 Sep 2013

Peter Joseph Crowley (Patent): IPO 27 Sep 2013

Industrial application – The invention related to a series of bags connected to form a vertical conveyer which rotates over rollers. Bags on the descending side of the conveyer are filled with water, causing the conveyer to rotate as the water-filled bags fall under gravity. Bags on the ascending side of the conveyer are empty, … Continue reading Peter Joseph Crowley (Patent): IPO 27 Sep 2013

Nike International Ltd, Avar, Grove, Kilgore and Friton (Patent): IPO 2 Aug 2013

An uncontested application was filed by Nike International Ltd. under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that both Bruce J. Kilgore and Michael R. Friton should be mentioned as joint inventors along with Eric P. Avar and James A. Grove in the granted patent for the invention and … Continue reading Nike International Ltd, Avar, Grove, Kilgore and Friton (Patent): IPO 2 Aug 2013

Philippe Bencteux and Steevy Cordette (Patent): IPO 9 Sep 2013

IPO An uncontested application was filed by Philippe Bencteux under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Steevy Cordette should be mentioned as a joint inventor along with Philippe Bencteux in the granted patent for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him as a joint … Continue reading Philippe Bencteux and Steevy Cordette (Patent): IPO 9 Sep 2013

Caleb Suresh Motupalli (Patent) O/401/13: IPO 4 Oct 2013

The application relates to ‘System and method for super-augmenting a persona to manifest a pan-environment super-cyborg for global governance’. The Hearing Officer considered the application to lack both industrial application and sufficiency and subsequently refused the application. Mrs C L Davies [2013] UKIntelP o40113, GB1213494.6 Bailii Patents Act 1977 1(1)(c) 1493) Intellectual Property Updated: 23 … Continue reading Caleb Suresh Motupalli (Patent) O/401/13: IPO 4 Oct 2013

Gareth Glass, Adrian Roberts and Nigel Davison (Patent): IPO 20 Aug 2013

Patent application GB 1009825.9 relates to electrochemical protection of steel in reinforced concrete exposed to the air. The applicants had been unable to satisfy the examiner that the claimed invention was novel and that amendments made to the application had not added matter. Following a hearing at which the applicants provided more information on the … Continue reading Gareth Glass, Adrian Roberts and Nigel Davison (Patent): IPO 20 Aug 2013

WMS Gaming Inc (Patent): IPO 24 Jun 2013

IPO PCT application WO 2009/128847 entitled ‘Apparatus for playing wagering games’ entered the UK national phase as patent application GB1018115.4. This invention allows a player to play a wagering game at a machine in the casino using funds in a remote account. Specifically, it allows one or more players to use syndicate funds or, alternatively, … Continue reading WMS Gaming Inc (Patent): IPO 24 Jun 2013

Tip-TopCom Ltd v Salvus Technology Limited (Patent): IPO 16 May 2013

IPO This decision relates to costs in revocation proceedings. In an earlier decision (BL/0326/12), the hearing officer found the claims as granted to be invalid for lack of novelty. However, revocation was subsequently avoided by amendment under section 75. The claimants were found to be entitled to an award of costs in line with the … Continue reading Tip-TopCom Ltd v Salvus Technology Limited (Patent): IPO 16 May 2013

Unilever plc v Procter and Gamble Company: CA 4 Nov 1999

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

Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997

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

Arvia Technology Limited, Edward P L Roberts, Nigel Willis Brown and Syed N Hussain (Patent): IPO 16 Oct 2013

IPO An uncontested application was filed by the patent agents of the proprietor Arvia Technology Limited under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Syed Hussain should be mentioned as a joint inventor along with Edward P L Roberts and Nigel Willis Brown in the published patent application … Continue reading Arvia Technology Limited, Edward P L Roberts, Nigel Willis Brown and Syed N Hussain (Patent): IPO 16 Oct 2013

Kirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc: HL 21 Oct 2004

The claims arose in connection with the validity and alleged infringement of a European Patent on erythropoietin (‘EPO’). Held: ‘Construction is objective in the sense that it is concerned with what a reasonable person to whom the utterance was addressed would have understood the author to be using the words to mean. Notice, however, that … Continue reading Kirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc: HL 21 Oct 2004

Catnic Components Ltd and Another v Hill and Smith Ltd: HL 1982

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

Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1: CA 27 Oct 2006

In each case it was said that the requested patent concerned an invention consisting of a computer program, and was not therefore an invention and was unpatentable. In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the appeal was against refusal. Held: Jacob LJ said: ‘the court must approach … Continue reading Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1: CA 27 Oct 2006

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Jet Airways (India) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Dec 2013

Allegation of infringement of patent for airline seats. The claimant sought to challenge the grant of a European Patent. Held: Virgin’s appeal was dismissed. England had surrendered jurisdiction to review or investigate the decision of European Patent Office (EPO) to register a patent Patten, Black, Kitchin LJJ [2013] EWCA Civ 1713, [2013] WLR (D) 511, … Continue reading Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Jet Airways (India) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Dec 2013

Robin Ray v Classic FM Plc: PatC 18 Mar 1998

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