| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2001] All ER (D) 227 (Dec) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2001] EWCA Civ 1610 |
| Court: | Court of Appeal, Civil Division |
| Judge: | Aldous, Sedley and Arden LJJ |
| Representation | David Kitchin QC and Richard Meade (instructed by Bristows) for the claimants. |
| David Young QC, Justin Turner and Thomas Hinchliffe (instructed by Lovells) for the defendants. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 14 December 2001 |
Catchwords
Patents - Infringement - Validity of patent - Terms of patent claim entirely unambiguous - Judge finding patent not infringed - Judge holding patent invalid - Whether judge correct - Application of Protocol on Interpretation when claim entirely in unambiguous terms - s 72(1)(c).
The Case
Where every term in a patent claim was clear and unambiguous, the court could not apply the principles of the Protocol on Interpretation in the normal manner; rather it had to seek the middle way as required by the Protocol of finding what was fair to the patentee and provided the required certainty to the public, whilst guarding against simply applying the literal interpretation outlawed by the Protocol.
Practice Areas
If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.
Lexis®Library
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- 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
