Haberman and another v Jackel International Ltd

Source:	All England Reporter
Publisher Citation:	[1999] All ER (D) 16
Court:	Chancery Division
Judge:	Laddie J
Representation	Michael Fysh QC and Adrian Speck (instructed by Paisner & Co) for the plaintiffs.
	Mark Platts-Mills QC and Charlotte May (instructed by Freshfields) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates:	15 January 1999

Patent - Validity of patent - Obviousness - Factors to be considered when determining whether development obvious.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis^®Library

The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary

This case summary is from Lexis®Library

For the digest and full transcript of this case, request a Lexis®Library Free Trial

"The Legal Library on LexisNexis Butterworths has freed up people’s time because it is instantaneous.

Our lock up - the period of time from the customer walking through the
door to billing - has improved.

That is our measure of profitability."

Helen Thompson, Head of Dispute Resolution - SAS Daniels

Use our traffic light system to ensure your legal references are accurate.

Find out more about Lexis^®Check.