Nador Cott Protection SAS v Asda Stores Limited & Anor

Nador Cott Protection SAS v Asda Stores Limited & Anor

Tang Gold does not retain the expression of essential characteristics (seediness and pollen viability) of Nadorcott, so is not essentially derived under section 7(3) of the Plant Varieties Act 1997. The scope of 'his rights' in section 6(3) refers only to UK rights; NCP had no reasonable opportunity to exercise its UK rights against unauthorised use of propagating material abroad, but even if foreign rights were relevant, NCP has not yet enforced them to prevent unauthorised use or harvested material. The action fails as Tang Gold is not a dependent variety.

Parties
Claimant: Nador Cott Protection S. A. S.; First Defendant: ASDA STORES LIMITED; Second Defendant: INTERNATIONAL PROCUREMENT AND LOGISTICS LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2026
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Infringement (plant Breeders’ Right) / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Essentially Derived Varieties, Statutory Interpretation, Scope of Plant Breeders’ Rights, Cascade Principle, International Implementation of UPOV, Reasonable Opportunity Defence
Intellectual Property Plant Variety Rights Essentially Derived Varieties Statutory Interpretation Scope of Plant Breeders’ Rights Cascade Principle International Implementation of UPOV Reasonable Opportunity Defence

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nador Cott Protection S. A. S.

Claimant

ASDA STORES LIMITED

First Defendant

INTERNATIONAL PROCUREMENT AND LOGISTICS LIMITED

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Infringement (plant Breeders’ Right) / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Tang Gold is essentially derived from Nadorcott under section 7(3) of the Plant Varieties Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether NCP is barred from enforcing its UK Plant Breeders’ Right by section 6(3) due to having had a reasonable opportunity to exercise its rights against unauthorised use of propagating material

Ratio Decidendi

Tang Gold does not retain the expression of essential characteristics (seediness and pollen viability) of Nadorcott, so is not essentially derived under section 7(3) of the Plant Varieties Act 1997. The scope of 'his rights' in section 6(3) refers only to UK rights; NCP had no reasonable opportunity to exercise its UK rights against unauthorised use of propagating material abroad, but even if foreign rights were relevant, NCP has not yet enforced them to prevent unauthorised use or harvested material. The action fails as Tang Gold is not a dependent variety.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed