Representatives of the Defendant company were said to have asserted, during an expressly ‘without prejudice’ meeting, that the plaintiff’s marketing of its product infringed the Defendant’s patent and threatened to bring an action for infringement. The plaintiff, relying on the statements made at the meeting, brought proceedings against the Defendant under section 70 of the Patents Act 1977 for threatening the plaintiff with proceedings for infringement of the patent.
Held: The overriding principal of without prejudice negotiations meant that disclosure in patents negotiations of perceived strengths and weaknesses was not to be used against a party. This is to be even more so under the new litigation regime. In a threat action, it does not matter that the threat may be veiled or covert, conditional or future. Nor does it matter that the threat is made in response to an enquiry from the party threatened.
Judges:
Laddie J
Citations:
Times 18-Mar-1999, [1999] EWHC Patents 250, [1999] FSR 849
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited – L’Oreal (UK) Limited and Another v Johnson and Johnson and Another ChD 7-Mar-2000
The claimant appealed against an order striking out their threat action for trade mark infringement, in respect of the words ‘No Tears’ when used for children’s shampoo.
Held: The court had to consider both the letter and the surrounding . .
See Also – 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 . .
Cited – Paymaster (Jamaica) Ltd and Another v Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Ltd PC 11-Dec-2017
(Court of Appeal of Jamaica) The parties disputed the ownership of copyight in certain computer software, and also an allegation of the misuse of confidential information. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice, Evidence
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135852