Technetix BV & Anor v Teleste Ltd

The selection of claim 1 as independently valid was not an admission but a procedural selection; even if it was an admission, the balance of prejudice and interests of justice favour allowing Technetix to proceed with its application to amend the patent.

Parties: Claimant: Technetix B.V.; Claimant: Technetix Limited; Defendant: Teleste Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 03 April 2019
Procedural Posture: Patent Action / Pre Trial Review
Outcome: Permission granted for Technetix to proceed with unconditional application to amend the patent.
Legal Topics: Amendment of Patent Claims, Withdrawal of Admissions, Case Management, Prejudice in Litigation

Intellectual Property Patents Amendment of Patent Claims Withdrawal of Admissions Case Management Prejudice in Litigation

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2

Parties

Technetix B.V.

Claimant

Technetix Limited

Claimant

Teleste Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Action / Pre Trial Review

Legal Issues

1 Whether Technetix's selection of claim 1 as independently valid constituted an admission that other claims were not independently valid
2 Whether Technetix should be permitted to amend the patent by deleting claim 1 and promoting claim 2
3 Whether permission should be granted to withdraw an alleged admission

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Permission granted for Technetix to proceed with unconditional application to amend the patent.

Orders

Technetix granted permission to go forward with its unconditional application to amend the patent.
Court to hear submissions on directions to minimise wasted costs, particularly with Teleste’s interests in mind.