 |
[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 >> Biofresh Ltd v Greenvale AP Ltd and International Controlled Atmospheres Ltd (Patent) [2005] UKIntelP o19805 (15 July 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2005/o19805.html Cite as: [2005] UKIntelP o19805 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o19805
Summary
Preliminary Decision
The defendants wanted revocation proceedings to be stayed to await consideration of amendments they had filed under s.75. They contended that they had been prejudiced by reason of the claimant filing the application for revocation without giving them notice of the prior art on which they were relying, which they thought to be contrary to the above Practice Direction. They should therefore have an opportunity to agree amendments without the involvement of the claimant, which would be simpler and would avoid the problems of distinguishing costs relating to amendment from those relating to revocation.
The hearing officer thought this argument took no account of the nature of proceedings and costs before the comptroller, and that no equitable right to amend under s.27 before an application for revocation was filed arose from the practice of the courts under the above Practice Direction; arguments on this point in any case had no relevance to whether the revocation proceedings should be stayed when amendments were filed under s.75. He refused a stay and remitted the case to follow the usual procedure where the revocation and amendment proceedings ran in parallel.