Kwikbolt Ltd v Airbus Operations Ltd
The proceedings should not be transferred to the Patents Court because the case is not complex, can be heard within two days in IPEC, and access to justice for the SME claimant would be prejudiced by higher costs in the Patents Court. The potential harm from an injunction does not justify transfer, as the trial...
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Claimant: Kwikbolt Limited; Defendant: Airbus Operations Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 31 July 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Proceedings
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Transfer of Proceedings, Access to Justice, Costs, Patent Infringement, Injunctions
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kwikbolt Limited
Claimant
Airbus Operations Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Should proceedings be transferred from IPEC to the Patents Court?
- 2 Does access to justice for SMEs outweigh complexity and value of claim?
- 3 Is the potential harm from an injunction relevant to transfer?
Ratio Decidendi
The proceedings should not be transferred to the Patents Court because the case is not complex, can be heard within two days in IPEC, and access to justice for the SME claimant would be prejudiced by higher costs in the Patents Court. The potential harm from an injunction does not justify transfer, as the trial judge will be better positioned to assess relief after trial.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- Proceedings to remain in IPEC
- No transfer to Patents Court
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment