The parties were co-proprietors of a patent. Mr Hughes appealed a decision confirming an order that the patent must be exploited.
Held: The comptroller had the power to make such an order. Parliament could not have intended a deadlock situation between the proprietors to allow the frustration of the exploitation of the patent. Though given a wide discretion, the comptroller had to act rationally, fairly and proportionately.
Judges:
The Master of the Rolls Lord Justice Jacob Lord Justice Neuberger
Citations:
[2006] EWCA Civ 818, Times 18-Jul-2006
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Hughes v Paxman CA 4-Jul-2006
Brief order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.244265
