Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2008] All ER (D) 68 (Jan)
Court: Chancery Division, Patents Court

Floyd J

Representation Michael Silverleaf QC (instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer) for the claimant.
  Guy Burkill QC (instructed by Lovells) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 17 January 2008


Disclosure and inspection of documents - Production of documents - Company documents - Company contending that it had no obligation to disclose group companies' documents - Whether documents were in company's control.

The Case

The defendant's application for the disclosure of documents relating to the claimant company's case that its patents for controlled sonar electromagnetic surveying equipment were invalid, on the basis of obviousness and a lack of an inventive step, was allowed as the documents that were sought could be considered to be in the claimants control as it had the general consent of the companies within its group to search through and disclose relevant documents.

Practice Areas

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