Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Jet Airways (India) Ltd & Ors

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Jet Airways (India) Ltd & Ors

The Solar Eclipse seat does not infringe the 908 patent as amended because the required passenger support element must be separate from the movable seat elements and disposed in the rearward space at all times, which is not satisfied by the accused product. Even if infringement were found, the amended claim would be invalid for added matter. The 734 patent is not invalid for obviousness or added matter. The UK designation of the 908 patent cannot be challenged in UK courts on non-designation grounds, as such challenges are not permitted under the EPC or Patents Act 1977, and Article 6 ECHR does not create a substantive right to do so.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Jet Airways (India) Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Delta Air Lines, Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Air Canada; Defendant/respondent: Zodiac Seats UK Ltd (formerly Contour Aerospace Ltd); Applicant to Intervene: The Comptroller General of Patents; Applicant to Intervene: The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (patents/infringement/validity) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals and Cross Appeals From High Court (patents Court)
Outcome
All appeals and cross-appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Added Matter, Obviousness, Designation of Contracting States, Jurisdiction of EPO, Article 6 ECHR, Procedural Barriers to Revocation
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Patent Infringement Patent Validity Added Matter Obviousness +4 more

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd

Claimant/appellant

Jet Airways (India) Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Air Canada

Defendant/respondent

Zodiac Seats UK Ltd (formerly Contour Aerospace Ltd)

Defendant/respondent

The Comptroller General of Patents

Applicant to Intervene

The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills

Applicant to Intervene

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (patents/infringement/validity) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals and Cross Appeals From High Court (patents Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 908 patent was infringed by Zodiac's Solar Eclipse seat system
  2. 2 Whether the 908 patent, if infringed, would be invalid for added matter
  3. 3 Whether the 734 patent is invalid for obviousness or added matter

Ratio Decidendi

The Solar Eclipse seat does not infringe the 908 patent as amended because the required passenger support element must be separate from the movable seat elements and disposed in the rearward space at all times, which is not satisfied by the accused product. Even if infringement were found, the amended claim would be invalid for added matter. The 734 patent is not invalid for obviousness or added matter. The UK designation of the 908 patent cannot be challenged in UK courts on non-designation grounds, as such challenges are not permitted under the EPC or Patents Act 1977, and Article 6 ECHR does not create a substantive right to do so.

Court Disposition

All appeals and cross-appeals dismissed.