NIPC Law

You might think that this would be quite different from that but if you did you'd be wrong.  The decision of Mr Justice Birss (as he now is) in  Lizzanno Partitions (UK) Ltd v Interiors Manufacturing Ltd [2013] EWPCC 12 (11 April 2013) is an object lesson in claim construction. It is also a text book example of the application of the law on novelty, obviousness, insufficiency, added value and infringement which is why I am going to dissect it at some length now and perhaps use it as a case study in my "Introduction to Intellectual Property" talk on the 26 June 2013. The Issues This was a claim by Lizzanno Partitions (UK) Ltd . ( "Lizzanno" )   for a declaration that the product identified in the first diagram did not infringe British patent number  GB 2 432 617  for a gasket ( "the patent" ) and revocation of the patent.    The patentee (whom the judge referred to as "Komfort" ) counterclaimed for injunctive and other re