The House considered what would amount to disclosure of an invention.
Lord Westbury LC said: ‘I apprehend the principle is correctly thus expressed: the antecedent statement must be such that a person of ordinary knowledge of the subject would at once perceive, understand and be able practically to apply the discovery without the necessity of making further experiments and gaining further information before the invention can be made useful. If something remains to be ascertained which is necessary for the useful application of the discovery, that affords sufficient room for another valid patent.’
Judges:
Lord Westbury LC
Citations:
(1862) 31 LJ(NS) 457
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.231505
