||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 91 (Oct)
|| EWCA Civ 1049
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Lloyd, Richards and Sullivan LJJ
||Colin Birss QC and Thomas Mitcheson (instructed by Linklaters LLP) for the claimant.
||Iain Purvis QC and Anna Edwards-Stuart (instructed by Withers LLP) for the defendant.
||11 October 2010
Patent - Validity - Patent in suit relating to sugar substitute - Judge finding patent invalid in light of prior art - Whether judge erring in construction of patent - Whether judge erring in revoking patent.
Patent Validity. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the appeal of the defendant in respect of the findings of a judge that its European patent relating to maltitol, a sugar substitute, and in particular to its crystallisation, as the judge had correctly construed the patent in suit and held that it was invalid.
- 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
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- 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