Machinery Developments Ltd & Anor v St Merryn Meat Ltd & Anor

Machinery Developments Ltd & Anor v St Merryn Meat Ltd & Anor

It is inappropriate to stay the appeal because the EPO opposition proceedings will take four to five years, causing real risk of prejudice to the defendants, and the patentees have not demonstrated sufficient prejudice beyond costs. The balance of justice favours proceeding with the appeal.

Parties
Respondent in 1419, Claimant/appellant in 2379: Machinery Developments Limited; Respondent in 1419, Claimant/appellant in 2379: Pechiney Plastic Packaging Inc; Defendant/appellant in 1419, Defendant/respondent in 2379: St Merryn Meat Limited; Defendant/appellant in 1419, Defendant/respondent in 2379: Sealed Air Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Stay Appeal Pending Outcome of EPO Opposition
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Stay of Proceedings, Costs, Parallel Proceedings
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Patent Infringement Stay of Proceedings Costs Parallel Proceedings

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Machinery Developments Limited

Respondent in 1419, Claimant/appellant in 2379

Pechiney Plastic Packaging Inc

Respondent in 1419, Claimant/appellant in 2379

St Merryn Meat Limited

Defendant/appellant in 1419, Defendant/respondent in 2379

Sealed Air Limited

Defendant/appellant in 1419, Defendant/respondent in 2379

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Stay Appeal Pending Outcome of EPO Opposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be stayed pending the outcome of EPO opposition proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the patentees would suffer prejudice if the stay is refused
  3. 3 Whether the defendants would suffer prejudice if the stay is granted

Ratio Decidendi

It is inappropriate to stay the appeal because the EPO opposition proceedings will take four to five years, causing real risk of prejudice to the defendants, and the patentees have not demonstrated sufficient prejudice beyond costs. The balance of justice favours proceeding with the appeal.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for stay of appeal dismissed with costs to be assessed