||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 142 (Apr)
|| EWHC 822 (Ch)
||Chancery Division (Patents Court)
||Thomas Moody-Stuart (instructed by Boodle Hatfield) for the applicant.
||James St.Ville (instructed by Maclay Murray & Spens) for the respondent.
||11 April 2006
Disclosure - Production of documents - Production before commencement of proceedings - Claim in respect of infringement of design right and copyright - Parties trading in direct competition with each other - Whether applicant having good cause of action - Whether court should exercise its discretion in favour of making order sought - CPR 31.16, .
To allow CPR 31.16 to become a means of examining a competitor's otherwise secret designs on the basis that some kind of infringement might have taken place could not be permissible unless there was at least a clear and convincing evidential basis for the belief that acts of infringement might have taken place and the court could be satisfied that the pre-action disclosure sought was highly focused.
- 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