MARFLEET & WEIGHT LIMITED V. THE NATIONAL MACHINERY CO.

MARFLEET & WEIGHT LIMITED V. THE NATIONAL MACHINERY CO.

Evidence established that machines incorporating the patented features were delivered and used before the priority dates, amounting to prior publication. The court accepted Hannaford’s evidence concerning use of the machine prior to 30 June 1952, thus answering the issues regarding prior publication in the affirmative.

Parties
Petitioner: Marfleet & Weight Ltd.; Respondent: The National Machinery Co.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 1956
Procedural Posture
Petition for Revocation of Patents and Action for Declaration of Non Infringement / Trial of Issues
Outcome
All questions for determination are answered in the affirmative. Further consideration of the petitions adjourned. Liberty to both parties to apply.
Legal Topics
Prior Publication, Revocation of Patents, Patent Infringement
Intellectual Property Patents Prior Publication Revocation of Patents Patent Infringement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marfleet & Weight Ltd.

Petitioner

The National Machinery Co.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Revocation of Patents and Action for Declaration of Non Infringement / Trial of Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner established that the patented inventions were published before the priority dates by sale, delivery, or use of reduceroll machines incorporating claimed features
  2. 2 Whether delivery, possession, or use of machines constituted prior publication

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence established that machines incorporating the patented features were delivered and used before the priority dates, amounting to prior publication. The court accepted Hannaford’s evidence concerning use of the machine prior to 30 June 1952, thus answering the issues regarding prior publication in the affirmative.

Court Disposition

All questions for determination are answered in the affirmative. Further consideration of the petitions adjourned. Liberty to both parties to apply.

Orders

  • All questions for determination are answered in the affirmative.
  • Adjourn further consideration of the petitions.