Patent

Curt G Joa, Inc. v Fameccanica Data SpA [2017] EWHC 1251 (IPEC), [2017] All ER (D) 164 (May)

The Chancery Division dismissed the defendant’s application to amend the specifications of a patent in the course of proceedings to revoke the patent concerning disposable absorbable garments such as diapers. The application was not allowable, since it would result in the specification disclosing additional matter, within the meaning of s 76(3(a) of the Patents Act 1977, and the amended claims would lack clarity contrary to s 14(5)(b). As a result, the patent stood 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

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations

What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection?

NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR

Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?

NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap

When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases

When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ

Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026

NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue

Error message

Patent

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Switalskis—four appointments

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope