header-logo header-logo

Patents

23 March 2012
Issue: 7506 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Pharma AG [2012] EWCA Civ 235, [2012] All ER (D) 87 (Mar)

It was well established that the task for the court in considering the issue of added matter was first: (i) to ascertain through the eyes of the skilled addressee what was disclosed, both explicitly and implicitly in the application; (ii) to do the same in respect of the patent; and (iii) to compare the two disclosures and decide whether any subject matter relevant to the invention had been added whether by deletion or addition. The comparison was strict in the sense that the subject matter would be added unless such matter was clearly and unambiguously disclosed in the application. Second, it was appropriate to consider what had been disclosed both expressly and implicitly. Third, the idea underlying the prohibition was that an applicant should not be allowed to improve his position by adding subject matter not disclosed in the application, which would give him an unwarranted advantage and could be damaging to the legal security of third parties relying on the

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

Taylor Rose—nine promotions

Taylor Rose—nine promotions

Leadership strengthened across core practice areas with nine new partners

Fieldfisher—Rebecca Maxwell

Fieldfisher—Rebecca Maxwell

Real estate team welcomes partner inBirmingham

Ward Hadaway—14 trainee solicitors

Ward Hadaway—14 trainee solicitors

Firm strengthens commitment to nurturing future legal talent

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll