Protomed Ltd v Medication Systems Ltd & Ors [2012] EWHC 3726 (Ch) (10 December 2012)

Protomed Ltd v Medication Systems Ltd & Ors [2012] EWHC 3726 (Ch) (10 December 2012)

The claimant does not have a good arguable case on infringement because the defendants' product does not have both compartments and pots as required by the plain wording of Claim 1 of the patent. The construction of 'compartments' in the claim requires a 3D aspect, which is not present in the defendants' product....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 3726 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Protomed Limited; Defendant: Medication Systems Limited; Defendant: Caremeds Limited; Defendant: Identicare Limited; Defendant: John Rowley; Defendant: Paul Burns
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application in Patent Infringement Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief)
Outcome
Application for interim injunction dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Interim Injunctions, Claim Construction
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Interim Injunctions Claim Construction

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Protomed Limited

Claimant

Medication Systems Limited

Defendant

Caremeds Limited

Defendant

Identicare Limited

Defendant

John Rowley

Defendant

Paul Burns

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application in Patent Infringement Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' product infringes Claim 1 of the claimant's patent
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a good arguable case for infringement to justify an interim injunction
  3. 3 Construction of 'compartments' and 'pots' in the patent claims

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant does not have a good arguable case on infringement because the defendants' product does not have both compartments and pots as required by the plain wording of Claim 1 of the patent. The construction of 'compartments' in the claim requires a 3D aspect, which is not present in the defendants' product. Therefore, the application for an interim injunction fails at the first limb of the American Cyanamid test.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction dismissed

Orders

  • Application for interim injunction is dismissed