Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 423 (Nov)
Neutral Citation: [2002] EWCA Civ 1702
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Aldous, Dyson LJJ and Sir Denis Henry

Representation Peter Prescott QC and Lindsay Lane (instructed by Laytons, Guildford) for the claimants.
  Richard Arnold QC and Benet Brandreth (instructed by Wragge & Co) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 28 November 2002

Catchwords

Patents - Infringement - Indirect infringement - Patent claim specifying computer gaming system - Defendant supplying punters in UK with computer program making punters' computer a terminal for defendant's gaming system - Defendant's host computer held abroad - Relevance of location of host computer to claim for direct infringement - s 60(2).

The Case

The words 'to put the invention into effect' within s60(2) of the had to require the means to be intended to put the apparatus claimed into effect; thereby requiring the claimed apparatus to become effective. Accordingly, where in the instant case a defendant had supplied punters with a program which made their computers terminals for the defendant's gaming system, but the defendant's host computer was abroad, it was not a defence to a claim for indirect infringement of a patent under s60(2) of the Act to say that the host computer was located abroad, since the supply of the CD in the UK to the UK punter had been intended to put the invention into effect in the UK.

Practice Areas

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