header-logo header-logo

24 February 2017
Issue: 7735 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Patent

Icescape Ltd v Ice-World International BV and others [2017] EWHC 42 (Pat), [2017] All ER (D) 142 (Feb)

The Chancery Division allowed the claimant company’s claim for, among other things, a declaration of non-infringement in respect of a patent concerning a cooling member for a mobile ice rink, which the claimant had commenced following allegations of infringement by the defendants. The court held that the priority of the patent had been the date of its filing. Since invalidity was conceded if the patent was not entitled to the priority date of the priority document, the patent had to be revoked.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

Law firm mfg Solicitors announces promotions at Ludlow office

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints partner in Leeds residential team

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners adds six to partnership in record year for partner promotions

NEWS
Calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14 have been renewed, with the Bar Council arguing the current threshold criminalises children too early and risks pushing them towards lifelong offending
The legal profession's AI challenge extends far beyond fabricated case citations, according to a warning about the next phase of technological risk
Law firms should use the transition period before the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) assumes anti-money laundering (AML) supervision to strengthen governance and compliance, experts have warned
Cross-border disputes increasingly demand creative approaches to gathering evidence, with litigators needing to look beyond traditional letters of request
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified the distinction between contracts of 'indefinite' and 'perpetual' duration, with potentially significant implications for commercial drafting
back-to-top-scroll