Clinisupplies Ltd v Park & Ors [2012] EWHC 3453 (Ch) (05 December 2012)

Clinisupplies Ltd v Park & Ors [2012] EWHC 3453 (Ch) (05 December 2012)

The pleaded aspects of the Vesica product, including the selection and layering of items, amount to methods or principles of construction or abstract concepts rather than protectable designs under section 213(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. As such, the claim discloses no reasonable grounds for asserting subsistence of design right and must be struck out. Alternatively, there is no real prospect of success at trial, warranting summary judgment for the defendants.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 3453 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: CliniSupplies Limited; First Defendant: Karen Park; Second Defendant: Richardson Healthcare Limited; Third Defendant: Mayur Patel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (intellectual Property) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Particulars)
Outcome
Claim for infringement of design right struck out; alternatively, summary judgment granted for the Second and Third Defendants.
Legal Topics
UK Unregistered Design Right, Design Right Infringement, Method or Principle of Construction Exclusion, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Intellectual Property Law UK Unregistered Design Right Design Right Infringement Method or Principle of Construction Exclusion Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CliniSupplies Limited

Claimant

Karen Park

First Defendant

Richardson Healthcare Limited

Second Defendant

Mayur Patel

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (intellectual Property) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Particulars)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's pleaded aspects of the Vesica product are protectable as unregistered design rights under section 213 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded features are excluded as a method or principle of construction under section 213(3)(a)
  3. 3 Whether the claim discloses reasonable grounds for design right infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded aspects of the Vesica product, including the selection and layering of items, amount to methods or principles of construction or abstract concepts rather than protectable designs under section 213(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. As such, the claim discloses no reasonable grounds for asserting subsistence of design right and must be struck out. Alternatively, there is no real prospect of success at trial, warranting summary judgment for the defendants.

Court Disposition

Claim for infringement of design right struck out; alternatively, summary judgment granted for the Second and Third Defendants.

Orders

  • CliniSupplies' claim for infringement of design right is struck out.
  • Alternatively, summary judgment is granted in favour of Richardson Healthcare Limited and Mayur Patel dismissing the design right claim.