Satco Plastics Ltd v Super Pack Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 29 (05 June 2013)

Satco Plastics Ltd v Super Pack Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 29 (05 June 2013)

Manufacture of articles overseas does not constitute primary infringement of UK unregistered design right under s.226 CDPA, as the right is territorial and the relevant acts must occur within the UK. Since all allegedly infringing items were made overseas and no secondary infringement was pleaded, the claim fails. Additionally, the evidence does not support a finding of copying of the claimant's design features by the defendant.

Citation
[2013] EWPCC 29
Parties
Claimant: Satco Plastics Limited; First Defendant: Super Pack Limited; Second Defendant: Wing Hong and Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Unregistered Design Right Infringement / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Unregistered Design Right, Primary Infringement, Territoriality of IP Rights, Design Copying, Must Fit Defence
Intellectual Property Unregistered Design Right Primary Infringement Territoriality of IP Rights Design Copying Must Fit 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Satco Plastics Limited

Claimant

Super Pack Limited

First Defendant

Wing Hong and Company Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Unregistered Design Right Infringement / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does manufacture of articles overseas constitute primary infringement of UK unregistered design right?
  2. 2 Were the design features of the claimant's containers copied by the defendant?

Ratio Decidendi

Manufacture of articles overseas does not constitute primary infringement of UK unregistered design right under s.226 CDPA, as the right is territorial and the relevant acts must occur within the UK. Since all allegedly infringing items were made overseas and no secondary infringement was pleaded, the claim fails. Additionally, the evidence does not support a finding of copying of the claimant's design features by the defendant.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Action against first defendant dismissed
  • Stay against second defendant lifted and action dismissed