Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2006] All ER (D) 346 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2006] EWCA Civ 1371
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Chadwick, Jacob and Neuberger LJJ

Representation Simon Thorley QC (instructed by Bristows) for A.
  Daniel Alexander QC (instructed by Linklaters) for T.
  Colin Birss (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Comptroller General of Patents.
  M did not appear and was not represented.
Judgment Dates: 27 October 2006


Patent - Invention - Exclusions from patentability - Business method - Computer program - Correct test for 'invention' - , s 1(2) - European Patent Convention, art 52.

The Case

The correct approach in determining whether an 'invention' was unpatentable within the terms of art52(2) and (3) of the European Patent Convention was in four steps: (i) to properly construe the claim; (ii) to identify the actual contribution; (iii) to ask whether it fell solely within the excluded subject matter; and (iv) to check whether the actual or alleged contribution was actually technical in nature.

Practice Areas

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