Stem cell treatments threatened by European patents ruling – The Guardian

“Work on revolutionary medical treatments for incurable diseases is in danger of being wiped out by a European court ruling on embryonic stem cells, according to leading scientists.”

Full story

The Guardian, 27th April 2011

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Ex-director given permanent ban on revealing confidential information – OUT-LAW.com

“A businessman has been ordered never to improperly reveal confidential information belonging to a company where he used to be a director.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 5th April 2011

Source: www.out-law.com

Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd and another [2011] EWCA Civ 303;  [2011] WLR (D)  115

“Where an invention was a product and one asked, for the purposes of section 60(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1977, whether a party had been ‘making’ a product, it was not appropriate to have regard to a ‘whole inventive concept’ test.”

WLR Daily, 29th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Proposed patent court not compatible with EU law, says ECJ – OUT-LAW.com

“The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has said that the planned creation of a pan-European Patent Court would break EU law. The European Commission has said that the ECJ opinion will not affect a second EU patent plan.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 9th March 2011

Source: www.out-law.com

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Delta Air Lines Inc – WLR Daily

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Delta Air Lines Inc [2011] EWCA Civ 162; [2011] WLR (D) 60

“Notwithstanding the difficulties which could arise in cases where the technology was complex, it should not be assumed that summary judgment was not for patent disputes; the general rules as to summary judgment applied equally to patent cases as to other types of case and where the technology was relatively simple to understand, and the court was able, on summary application, to form a confident view about the claim and its construction, in particular about the understanding of the man skilled in the art, there was no good reason why summary procedure could not be invoked.”

WLR Daily, 25th February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Shanks v Unilever plc and others – WLR Daily

Shanks v Unilever plc and others [2010] EWCA Civ 1283; [2010] WLR (D) 300

“‘That person’ in s 41(2) of the Patents Act 1977 meant the actual assignee with its actual attributes rather than a notional non-connected counterparty operating in the appropriate market at the appropriate time.”

WLR Daily, 26th November 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Inventor entitled to share of employer’s actual, not potential patent earnings, says Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

“The inventor of a medical device is entitled to a ‘fair share’ of the actual benefit earned from that device by his employer, the Court of Appeal has ruled. An inventor cannot complain if his employer did not exploit the invention well or at all, it said.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 29th November 2010

Source: www.out-law.com