16th Annual Patent Seminar — the Virtue of Justice
By Gordon Harris
In opening this talk last year, I speculated about the reasons why there had been relatively little in the way of significant developments in case law in patent litigation in recent years. I wondered if the judiciary had done such a good job at resolving the basic issues that now little more needed to be done each year than to apply a ‘touch on the tiller’. By way of illustration, let me just reflect on some of the areas that constitute my usual headings for this annual paper.
In the field of construction, there has been little more to say about how patents should be read since the decision in Amgen as slightly amended in the Virgin v Contour case.
Moving on to anticipation, there has been little further development here since the House of Lords (as it then was) distilled previous authority and produced a definitive judgment in the Synthon case…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Wragge & Co briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
Why register to The Lawyer
More relevant to you
News from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
Continuing our back to basics series, Wragges considers some of the practical points to consider if you think a dispute may be looming.
‘Swiss’ form patent claims do not need subjective intent for infringement: Court of Appeal rules in Warner-Lambert v Actavis
The English Court of Appeal has issued considered, well-reasoned guidance on the construction of patent claims in ‘Swiss’ form. The decision is likely to have impact well beyond British shores.