JC Bamford Excavators Limited v Manitou UK Limited & Anor.

JC Bamford Excavators Limited v Manitou UK Limited & Anor.

EP 065 and GB 595 lack inventive step over Kruger and Tadano; the skilled person would obviously apply the soft-stop system from the prior art to telehandlers using conventional sensors. EP 965 lacks inventive step over Aichi I, which discloses disabling the load moment control system when the vehicle is in motion. EP 382 is inventive over GB 595 and Tadano; the idea of a variable threshold for restricting arm movement based on arm angle was not obvious to the skilled person and not disclosed or suggested by the prior art. Infringement findings depend on configuration: Manitou's configuration A and D machines infringe EP 382; configurations C do not.

Parties
Claimant: J. C. Bamford Excavators Limited; Defendant: Manitou UK Limited; Defendant: Manitou BF S. A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
JCB's patents EP 065, EP 965, GB 595 invalid for lack of inventive step; EP 382 valid and infringed in part.
Legal Topics
Inventive Step, Obviousness, Patent Infringement, Equivalents, Insufficiency
Intellectual Property Patents Inventive Step Obviousness Patent Infringement Equivalents Insufficiency

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. C. Bamford Excavators Limited

Claimant

Manitou UK Limited

Defendant

Manitou BF S. A.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether JCB's patents (EP 065, EP 965, EP 382, GB 595) are valid for inventive step over cited prior art
  2. 2 Whether Manitou's telehandler configurations infringe JCB's patents, including by equivalents
  3. 3 Whether the patents are insufficient

Ratio Decidendi

EP 065 and GB 595 lack inventive step over Kruger and Tadano; the skilled person would obviously apply the soft-stop system from the prior art to telehandlers using conventional sensors. EP 965 lacks inventive step over Aichi I, which discloses disabling the load moment control system when the vehicle is in motion. EP 382 is inventive over GB 595 and Tadano; the idea of a variable threshold for restricting arm movement based on arm angle was not obvious to the skilled person and not disclosed or suggested by the prior art. Infringement findings depend on configuration: Manitou's configuration A and D machines infringe EP 382; configurations C do not.

Court Disposition

JCB's patents EP 065, EP 965, GB 595 invalid for lack of inventive step; EP 382 valid and infringed in part.

Orders

  • EP 065, EP 965, GB 595 revoked for lack of inventive step.
  • EP 382 upheld as valid.