BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Bio Pure Technology Ltd v (1) Jarzon Plastics Ltd and (2) Anthony Elliott (Patent) [2005] UKIntelP o08705 (31 March 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2005/o08705.html Cite as: [2005] UKIntelP o08705, [2005] UKIntelP o8705 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o08705
Summary
Bio Pure had approached Jarzon about a new plastics clamp they wished to produce. Following discussions between the two sides, Jarzon produced drawings which incorporated the main invention of the patents and applications in suit. The Hearing Officer held that:
1. There was a contract between Bio Pure and Jarzon for the production of those drawings.
2. To make business sense of that contract, it was necessary to imply a term that any patent rights belonged to Bio Pure (Robin Ray v Classic FM plc [1998] FSR 622 and other case law considered).
3. The main invention had in any case been devised by someone on Bio Pure's side, not by the named inventor Mr Elliott who worked for Jarzon.
A ruling on whether there were any significant features covered by subordinate claims which justified Mr Elliott being named as a co-inventor, and if so, whether that gave Jarzon any rights in respect of those features, was deferred pending further submissions.
