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!



BAILII [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 >> Pilot Drilling Control Ltd and Smith International Inc (Patent) [2011] UKIntelP o04611 (23 February 2011)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2011/o04611.html
Cite as: [2011] UKIntelP o04611, [2011] UKIntelP o4611

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


Pilot Drilling Control Ltd and Smith International Inc [2011] UKIntelP o04611 (23 February 2011)

For the whole decision click here: o04611

Patent decision

BL number
O/046/11
Concerning rights in
GB 2410760
Hearing Officer
Mr A C Howard
Decision date
23 February 2011
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
Pilot Drilling Control Ltd and Smith International Inc
Provisions discussed
Patents Act 1977 Section 118(1); Patents Rules 2007, Rules 53 and 84
Keywords
Confidentiality
Related Decisions
None

Summary

The main proceedings relate to a proprietorship dispute. This was a preliminary decision to determine a request by the claimants for the statement and all subsequent papers filed in the proceedings to be kept confidential on the grounds that the reputations of both parties would be damaged if knowledge of the proceedings were to become public. Although the defendants withdrew their initial opposition to the request, they filed no arguments in support of it. The Hearing Officer considered that the usual rule is that proceedings should be public, and a departure from this principle could be justified only in exceptional circumstances. In the present case insufficient evidence of the harm that could result from publicity had been demonstrated. In respect of one document however, redaction of the version available to the public was allowed in the light of specific arguments about the commercial sensitivity of information contained in the respective text.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2011/o04611.html