Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2008] All ER (D) 282 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2008] EWCA Civ 23
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Ward, Mummery and Jacob LJJ

Representation Richard Arnold QC (instructed by Wragge & Co) for the defendants.
  Daniel Alexander QC and Justin Turner (instructed by Rouse Legal) for the claimant.
Judgment Dates: 31 January 2008

Catchwords

Patent - Revocation - Stay of proceedings - Concurrent proceedings - Opposition to grant of patent filed in European Patent Office by claimant - Claimant presenting claim for revocation of patent in English court - Patentee applying for stay of English proceedings pending decision of European Patent Office in opposition proceedings - Court refusing to grant stay - Whether judge erring - .

The Case

It was legitimate for a person contesting the validity of a European patent to attack it both in an action for revocation in the United Kingdom courts and by opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office (EPO). The grant of a patent by the EPO did not create an estoppel which would prevent the UK courts from determining whether or not the patent should be revoked. The Court of Appeal offered general guidance on the Patent Court's discretion to stay legal proceedings on the ground that there were parallel proceedings pending in the EPO contesting the validity of the patent.

Practice Areas

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