Environmental Defence Systems Ltd v Synergy Health Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 1306 (IPEC) (01 May 2014)

Environmental Defence Systems Ltd v Synergy Health Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 1306 (IPEC) (01 May 2014)

There was no inventive step in using the known method of manufacturing absorbent pads as part of the process for making barrage units, as it would have been obvious to a skilled person in the field of flood defences, given the common general knowledge of sandless sandbags and the use of absorbent polymers for such purposes at the priority date. The arrangement of pads within a porous bag or sack was also obvious.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 1306 (IPEC)
Parties
Claimant: Environmental Defence Systems Limited; Defendant: Synergy Health PLC; Defendant: Synergy Health (UK) Limited; Defendant: Gravitas (International) Limited; Defendant: Jacob Sallon; Defendant: David Sallon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Validity (preliminary Issue) / Trial of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Patent claims held invalid for lack of inventive step.
Legal Topics
Inventive Step, Obviousness, Patent Infringement, Person Skilled in the Art, Common General Knowledge
Intellectual Property Patent Law Inventive Step Obviousness Patent Infringement Person Skilled in the Art Common General Knowledge

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Environmental Defence Systems Limited

Claimant

Synergy Health PLC

Defendant

Synergy Health (UK) Limited

Defendant

Gravitas (International) Limited

Defendant

Jacob Sallon

Defendant

David Sallon

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Validity (preliminary Issue) / Trial of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is an inventive step in using the method of manufacture of absorbent pads described in claims 1, 6 or 9 of European Patent (UK) 2 393 989 in the manufacture of a barrage unit

Ratio Decidendi

There was no inventive step in using the known method of manufacturing absorbent pads as part of the process for making barrage units, as it would have been obvious to a skilled person in the field of flood defences, given the common general knowledge of sandless sandbags and the use of absorbent polymers for such purposes at the priority date. The arrangement of pads within a porous bag or sack was also obvious.

Court Disposition

Patent claims held invalid for lack of inventive step.

Orders

  • There is no inventive step in the methods of manufacture of barrage units as claimed in any of claims 1, 6 and 9 of European Patent (UK) 2 393 989.