Category: Intellectual Property

Tecniq’s Limited (Patent) O04214: IPO 24 Jan 2014

The invention concerned a vessel propulsion system in which propellers or water jets act to move the vessel through the water. The propellers or water jets are powered by electric motors which are energised from batteries within the vessel. These batteries are recharged by power generated from a series of turbines attached to the hull of the vessel, the turbines generating power from the flow of water created as the vessel moves through the water. The Hearing Officer considered whether the invention was capable of industrial application and concluded that it was not because the invention could not function in the manner described in the application. The application was refused under section 1(1)(c).

Judges:

Mr A Bartlett

Citations:

[2014] UKIntelP O04214

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.523931

Tecniq’s Limited (Patent) O04114: IPO 24 Jan 2014

The invention related to a hybrid powered aircraft having fuel engines and electric motors to power the propulsion means, such as propellers. The electric motors are attached to batteries to power the electric motors. The batteries can be charged by means of encapsulated turbines which rotate and generate electric power as the aircraft is moving. Having carefully construed the claims, the Hearing Officer decided that the invention was capable of industrial application and sufficiently disclosed. The application was remitted back to the examiner for further examination.

Judges:

Mr A Bartlett

Citations:

[2014] UKIntelP O04114

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.523930

Bamgboye and Another v Reed and others: QBD 28 Nov 2002

Claim to share in the copyright in respect of the original musical work, the copyright in respect of a sound recording and performer’s rights, in relation to a piece of popular music, which I think is of the genre described as ‘two-step’, and which is called ‘Bouncing Flow’.

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2922 (QB), [2004] EMLR 5

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.263154

Bignell (T/A Just Employment (A Firm)) v Just Employment Law Ltd: ChD 2 Oct 2007

A solicitor practising under the business name Just Employment, seeks damages including additional damages, wide ranging injunctions and other relief for registered trade mark infringement and passing off.

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2203 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.259799

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Another v Merrell Pharmaceuticals Inc and Another: ChD 12 Oct 2007

Judges:

Warren J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2276 (Ch), (2008) 102 BMLR 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.259858

Coffey v Warner Chappell Music Ltd, Warner Music UK Ltd and EMI Music Publishing Ltd: ChD 16 May 2005

The singer had recorded a song, ‘Forever After’. She sought damages in copyright saying that a later recording by the defendants titled ‘Nothing Really Matters’ was infringing, having copied elements of the voice expression of her own performance, particularly the timbre, pitch contour and the syncopation. The defendants asked the court to strike out the claim, asserting that what was alleged to have been copied was not itself protected by copyright, that it was not a musical work, but just certain selected features of the work. They went on to say that if copyright was to be claimed for some part of a work, it had to form a substantial part, and it was not open to the claimant to herself select which features went to make up the work for which she claimed protection. The claimant answered saying that there might well be circumstances where a constituent part of a larger work may be entitled to a copyright.
Held: The strike out request succeeded. Copyright existed in a work in its entirety, not in parts of or extracts from the work. A copying of part of a work might infringe the copyright in the entire work, if it formed a substantial part. An assessment have to be made in each particular case according the facts. The court declined to follow a path which would lead to recognition of layers making up different artistic copyrights, and open up all sorts of new problems. To find a separate copyright the court should look to see whether the element for which a separate copyright was asserted could in some way stand alone.

Judges:

Blackburne J

Citations:

[2005] ECDR (21) 312, HC 03CO4523, [2005] EWHC 449 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – IPC Media Ltd v Highbury-Leisure Publishing Ltd ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimant magazine publisher alleged breach of copyright by the defendant in their magazine, as to the cover page designs used. It was not clear just which cover was said to have been copied.
Held: The first step in a copyright action is . .
Cited – Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc HL 12-Jul-2001
The respondent company subscribed to a cuttings service, but redistributed the cuttings within its offices. The cuttings agency claimed that the re-distribution infringed their rights in the typographical arrangement. The cuttings did not give any . .
Cited – Coogi Australia Pty Ltd v Hysport International Pty Ltd 1998
(Federal Court of Australia) What makes up the copyright work is in any given case is not governed by what the claimant alleging copyright infringement chooses to say that it is. It is rather a matter for objective determination by the court.
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246800

Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and others: CA 24 Nov 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1599

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Inc and others Patc 9-Sep-2004
. .
See Also – Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd Patc 8-Nov-2004
. .
See Also – Halliburton Energy Services, Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and others PatC 21-Jul-2005
A claim was made for a method of design in which certain calculations were to be carried out recursively, modifying the results each time until a particular criterion was satisfied. Though the method was susceptible of solution by computer, but the . .
See Also – Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and others CA 21-Feb-2006
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and others CA 15-Dec-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246686

Valentine v Regina: CACD 10 Nov 2006

The defendant appealed his sentence for conspiracy to supply counterfeit drugs.
Held: The defendant need only serve the sentence if he failed to pay a penalty which the court had decided he could afford to pay. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ, Holland J, Loraine-Smith J

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 2717

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968 8, Trade Marks Act 1994 92, Criminal Justice Act 1988 72AA, Drug Trafficking Act 1994 4(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246056

Novartis Ag v Ivax Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd: PatC 16 Oct 2006

Patents – action for infringement of two patents relating to the formulation of cyclosporin, which is a pharmaceutical of particular utility in producing immunosuppression in recipients of allogenic organ transplants.

Judges:

Pumfrey J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2506 (Pat)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Novartis (Ag) v Ivax Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd CA 18-Oct-2007
Novartis appeals the decision of Pumfrey J, [2006] EWHC 2506 (Pat) that Ivax’s ‘Equoral’ product does not infringe its UK patent No. 2,222,770 (the ‘Patent’). The Judge held the patent valid. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245380

Generics (UK) Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S: CA 2 Aug 2006

Judges:

Chadwick, Neuberger, Jacob LJJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1261

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – SABAF SpA v MFI Furniture Centres Ltd and Another CA 11-Jul-2002
The appellant challenged dismissal of its claim for patent infringement. The judge had held that the design was obvious, involving essentially only the collocation of two known features.
Held: Collocation was no more than a species of . .

Cited by:

See Also – Generics (UK) Ltd and others v H Lundbeck A/S PatC 4-May-2007
Kitchin J said: ‘The question of obviousness must be considered on the facts of each case. The court must consider the weight to be attached to any particular factor in the light of all the relevant circumstances. These may include such matters as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245167

Seer Technologies Inc and Another v Abbas: CA 27 Feb 2001

Application for permission to appeal in respect of a decision on an application for permission to re-amend his counterclaims which are now the only effective part of the original proceedings and for permission to re-amend points of claim in an inquiry as to damages suffered by virtue of certain undertakings which Mr Abbas at one point gave in lieu of an injunction against him.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 314

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.200835

Regina v Brentwood Borough Council Ex Parte Peck: Admn 18 Dec 1997

The claimant sought judicial review of the authority’s distribution to the media of a CCTV film of his attempted suicide.
Held: A Local Authority which was empowered to make video recording of street events had a power to distribute resulting film being unaware of objection.

Judges:

Harrison J

Citations:

Times 18-Dec-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 1041

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 111

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Judicial Review, Local Government, Media

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.86197

Siemens Schweiz Ag v Thorn Security Ltd: ChD 4 Oct 2007

Patent action in which the claimant asserts its patent against the defendant and alleges infringement in respect of a coating for printed circuit boards (‘PCBs’). The defendant seeks to have the patent revoked on the basis of obviousness over one particular piece of prior art.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2242 (Ch), [2008] RPC 4, (2007) 30(10) IPD 30062

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.259666

Nova Productions Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd and others: CA 25 Jul 2006

Request for reference to European Court – infringement of copyright in computer game.

Judges:

Waller, Jonathan Parker, Jacob LJJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1044

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Nova Productions Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd and others ChD 20-Jan-2006
The claimant alleged copyright infringement in respect of computer games in the coin operated video market. It was said not that the games copied bitmap graphics, but rather the composite frames which appeared on the screen.
Held: The games . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243401

Rossi v OHIM: ECJ 18 Jul 2006

ECJ Appeals – Community trade mark – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Likelihood of confusion – Word mark SISSI ROSSI – Opposition by the holder of the earlier word mark MISS ROSSI – Arguments presented for the first time at the hearing – Offers of evidence.

Citations:

C-214/05, [2006] EUECJ C-214/05

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 40/94 8(1)(b)

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243418

West Sussex County Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Kahraman: Admn 13 Jun 2006

The complainant appealed dismissal of charges against the respondent of displaying for sale goods bearing marks identical to registered trade marks. The defendant asserted that he had reasonable grounds for belief that the goods were not counterfeit having cecked with market officials and a VAT inspector. The magistrates had acted on the basis that the test was objective not subjective,
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal was allowed. McCombe J: ‘a market trader, like Mr Kahraman here, who purchases goods with well-known designer names on them at very low prices, from a person of unknown identity (even if not positively ‘disreputable’) and with no positive evidence of trade reputation cannot begin to discharge the burden of proof imposed upon him by Section 92(5). It cannot conceivably be sufficient to observe other traders in similar circumstances buying goods or that the defendant is inexperienced in his trade or new to the market. The defence of reasonableness applies in equal manner to the experienced and the inexperienced. ‘

Judges:

Latham LJ, McCombe J, Dobbs J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1703 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Marks Act 1994 92(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v McCrudden CACD 2005
Laws LJ: ‘Section 92(5) affords a positive and specific defence as to the use of the trade mark by the defendant. It does not provide a general defence of good faith … It seems to us that the provisions contained in section 92 have been devised to . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Regina v Rhodes CACD 2002
Andrew Smith J: ‘No doubt in many cases the fact that a trader could ascertain whether a trade mark was registered by searching the register will make it extremely difficult to establish a belief involving ignorance of a registered mark is held on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Crime

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243313

Rossi v OHMI – Marcorossi: ECFI 12 Jul 2006

ECJ Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark MARCOROSSI – Earlier national and international word marks MISS ROSSI – Earlier Community word mark SERGIO ROSSI – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion

Citations:

T-97/05, [2006] EUECJ T-97/05

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243115