Shanks v Unilever Plc & Ors
The benefit derived by Unilever from the Shanks Patents, net of tax and costs, was not outstanding in the context of Unilever's overall business. The hearing officer's multi-factorial assessment was correct and contained no error of principle. Prof Shanks is not entitled to employee compensation under section 40(1).
- Parties
- Claimant and Appellant: Ian Alexander Shanks; Defendant and Respondent: Unilever PLC; Defendant and Respondent: Unilever NV; Defendant and Respondent: Unilever UK Central Resources Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 May 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Employee Compensation for Inventions, Patents, Outstanding Benefit, Fair Share Determination
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ian Alexander Shanks
Claimant and Appellant
Unilever PLC
Defendant and Respondent
Unilever NV
Defendant and Respondent
Unilever UK Central Resources Limited
Defendant and Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the benefit derived by Unilever from the Shanks Patents was outstanding under section 40(1) of the Patents Act 1977
- 2 How to quantify the benefit derived from the patents
- 3 What constitutes a fair share for the employee
Ratio Decidendi
The benefit derived by Unilever from the Shanks Patents, net of tax and costs, was not outstanding in the context of Unilever's overall business. The hearing officer's multi-factorial assessment was correct and contained no error of principle. Prof Shanks is not entitled to employee compensation under section 40(1).
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment