Chinese Utility Models and prior art
The Court of Appeal has upheld a decision of HHJ Birss QC in the Patents County Court (now the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court) finding that the appellant’s patent for a baby buggy module was invalid for obviousness.
The respondent, Phil & Ted’s Most Excellent Buggy Company, argued that the prior art — the ‘Goodbaby’ — was such that if a skilled person were to put the disclosure into practice, without any inventive step, the resulting product would fall within the ambit of the claim of the patent in suit. The patent in suit was a buggy module, convertible between seat and cot configurations; the Goodbaby was also convertible between seat and cot configurations, so the Court of Appeal had no difficulty in concluding that a skilled person would have treated the Goodbaby as an appropriate starting point for the invention…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing.
News from Walker Morris
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Walker Morris
Southend-On-Sea Borough Council v Armour is a tenancy repossession case in which the tenant invoked a successful article 8 defence.
The draft Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 are due to come into force on 1 October 2014.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The law school war shows no signs of ending. But we have, perhaps, reached the end of the beginning.
New EU rules and lawyers’ increased comfort with digital formats are sparking a sea-change in the way law firms manage their documents