IDA Ltd and others v University of Southampton and others; University of Southampton’s Applications; Patc 28 Jul 2004

References: [2004] EWHC 2107 (Pat), [2005] RPC 220
Links: Bailii
Coram: Laddie J
Disclosure and enablement are distinct concepts in patents law, each of which has to be satisfied and each of which has its own rules. As to sufficiency: ‘In my view, devising an invention and providing enabling disclosure are two quite different things. Although both may be necessary to secure valid protection, as section 14 of the Act shows, they relate to different aspects of the law of patents. It is very possible to make a good invention but to lose one’s patent for failure to make an enabling disclosure. The requirement to include an enabling disclosure is concerned with teaching the public how the invention works, not with devising the invention in the first place.’
In the phrase ‘the actual deviser of the invention’, the word ‘actual’ denotes a contrast with a deemed or pretended deviser of the invention;the natural person who ‘came up with the inventive concept.’
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 21-Nov-15 Ref: 227182