header-logo header-logo

Inventor’s ‘outstanding benefit’ worth £2m

23 October 2019
Issue: 7861 / Categories: Legal News , Intellectual property , Health & safety
printer mail-detail
A professor who invented a device vital to diabetes treatment has won a landmark patent case on the determination of ‘outstanding benefit’.

In a unanimous ruling this week, the Supreme Court held Professor Shanks is entitled to compensation under the Patents Act 1977, s 40, on the basis the patents for the product he invented in 1982 have been of outstanding benefit to his employer and he is entitled to a fair share of that benefit, in Shanks v Unilever Plc [2019] UKSC 45.

Professor Shanks initially received a salary of £18,000 and a Volvo car for his work on biosensors, during which he conceived a system for measuring the glucose concentration in blood, serum or urine. He built the prototype at home using Mylar film and slides from his daughter’s toy microscope kit and bulldog clips to hold the assembly together. He accepts the rights to his inventions were owned by his employer, which sold them to Unilever for £100. The Shanks patents would later be worth more than £19m, and Unilever’s total earnings from the patents were about £24m.

The court considered the meaning of ‘outstanding benefit’ and what percentage of earnings should be allocated.

Giving the lead judgment, Lord Kitchin held it was fair to apply a 5% share of the £24m, which gave Professor Shanks £2m.

He said the statutory test required the benefit to be ‘outstanding’, which is ‘an ordinary English word meaning exceptional or such as to stand out and it refers here to the benefit (in terms of money or money’s worth) of the patent to the employer rather than the degree of inventiveness of the employee’. In determining the ‘benefit’ to Unilever, Lord Kitchin said the court must consider what is the employer’s undertaking for this purpose, and ‘what is the relevance of that undertaking’s size and nature?’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll