NIPC Law

Author RickDikeman   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons     Jane Lambert Patents Court (David Stone) Networld Sports Ltd v Quick Play Sport Ltd [2026] EWHC 1295 (Ch) (1 June 2026) This was an appeal by Networld Sports Ltd ("Networld") against the decision of Dr Benjamin Micklewright on behalf of the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks of 14 Oct 2025 not to revoke claims 1 and 10 of  European patent (UK) 2 146 786 B1  on grounds of anticipation and obviousness.  The appeal was heard by Mr David Stone sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court on 9 March 2026.  Mr Stone handed down his judgment on 1 June 2026.  By para [43] of his judgment in  Networld Sports Ltd v Quick Play Sport Ltd [2026] EWHC 1295 (Ch) (1 June 2026), he dismissed Networld's appeal. The Invention The title of the patent was "Goal Apparatus".   It consisted of a  frame,  first and second flexible ...

Autho r Brenton Licence CC BY-SA 4.0 Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Cour t (HH Judge Hacon) S andoz AG and others v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2024] EWHC 796 (Pat) (12 April 2024 ) These were conjoined actions by several generic pharmaceutical manufacturers against Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH ("Bayer") for the revocation of European patent (UK) 1 845 961 ("the Patent") for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders with rivaroxaban . There were also counterclaims by Bayer for injunctions to restrain the threatened infringement of the Patent. Those threats were conceded for the purposes of the trial. Consequently, the validity of the Patent was the only issue to be tried. His Honour Judge Hacon tried those actions on 9, 12, 13,14, 15 and 16 Jan and 21 and 22 Feb 2024. By para [272] of his judgment in Sandoz AG and others v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2024] EWHC 796 (Pat) handed down on 12 April 2024, the learned judge found t...

Author Judicial Office UK Licence CC BY-SA 4.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Zacaroli) Parsons v Convatec Lt d [2023] EWHC 1535 (Pat) (26 June 2023) This was an application by an employer to strike out or summarily dismiss part of its employee's claim for compensation under s.40 of the Patents Act 1977.  S.7 (2) of the Patents Act 1977 states that a patent for an invention may be granted primarily to the inventor except where a rule of law or contract entitles someone else to claim the invention.  One such exception is provided by s.39  which entitles employers to claim their employees' inventions in certain circumstances.  Most employees who are expected to invent something in the course of their employment enjoy generous salaries and benefits but there are some inventions that are so valuable to the employer that it is just to reward the employee with something extra.  S.40 makes provision for such re...

  Jane Lambert Patents Court  (HH Judge Hacon)  Autostore Technology AS v Ocado Group Plc and others [2023] EWHC 716 (Pat) (30 March 2023) This was a patent infringement action.  The claimant, AutoStore Technology AS ("AutoStore"), complained that the defendants had infringed two of its European patents.  The defendants denied infringement and challenged the validity of the patents on grounds of anticipation and obviousness .  They also sought declarations of non-infringement.  The claim and counterclaim came on for trial before His Honour Judge Hacon in March and April 2022.   He handed down judgment on 30 March 2023 (see AutoStore Technology AS v Ocado Group Plc and others [2023] EWHC 716 (Pat)). The Issues The anticipation challenge turned on whether disclosures of the invention to a prospective customer before the priority date in an email and at a presentation in Norway had been made in confidence. That in turn depended on whether Nor...