Unilin Beheer BV v Berry Floor NV & Ors (No. 2) [2005] EWCA Civ 1292 (03 November 2005)

Unilin Beheer BV v Berry Floor NV & Ors (No. 2) [2005] EWCA Civ 1292 (03 November 2005)

The presence of irrelevant or harmless material in the patent specification, which does not mislead or affect the clarity of the claims, does not amount to a lack of reasonable skill and knowledge under s.63(2) Patents Act 1977. Therefore, the patentee is not deprived of damages for past infringement on this basis.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1292
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Unilin Beheer BV; Appellant/defendant: Berry Floor NV; Appellant/defendant: Information Management Consultancy Ltd (t/a Responsive Designs plc); Appellant/defendant: B&Q plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation Appeal / Appeal From Patents County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Specification Drafting, Partial Validity of Patents, Damages for Infringement, Amendment of Patent Claims, Reasonable Skill and Knowledge in Patent Drafting
Intellectual Property Law Patent Law Patent Specification Drafting Partial Validity of Patents Damages for Infringement Amendment of Patent Claims Reasonable Skill and Knowledge in Patent Drafting

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unilin Beheer BV

Respondent/claimant

Berry Floor NV

Appellant/defendant

Information Management Consultancy Ltd (t/a Responsive Designs plc)

Appellant/defendant

B&Q plc

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation Appeal / Appeal From Patents County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the patent specification was framed with reasonable skill and knowledge under s.63(2) Patents Act 1977
  2. 2 Whether the presence of irrelevant or harmless material in the specification deprives the patentee of damages for past infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The presence of irrelevant or harmless material in the patent specification, which does not mislead or affect the clarity of the claims, does not amount to a lack of reasonable skill and knowledge under s.63(2) Patents Act 1977. Therefore, the patentee is not deprived of damages for past infringement on this basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Patentee entitled to damages for past infringement and costs, subject to the discretion of the court as to costs and the date from which damages should be reckoned.