The Janger Ltd v Tesco Plc

The Janger Ltd v Tesco Plc

Claim 1 is anticipated by Jones; claims 4 and 5 are obvious over Jones; the Globalhanger disclosure was made under conditions of confidence and does not invalidate the patent claims.

Parties
Claimant: The Janger Limited; Defendant: Tesco PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Infringement and Validity / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Patent claims 1, 4, and 5 are invalid due to anticipation and obviousness; Globalhanger disclosure does not affect validity due to confidentiality.
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Anticipation, Obviousness, Confidentiality, Prior Disclosure
Intellectual Property Patent Law Patent Validity Anticipation Obviousness Confidentiality Prior Disclosure

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Janger Limited

Claimant

Tesco PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Infringement and Validity / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims 1, 4, and 5 of GB 2 552 562 B are valid
  2. 2 Whether Jones anticipates or renders obvious the patent claims
  3. 3 Whether the Globalhanger disclosure was made in confidence

Ratio Decidendi

Claim 1 is anticipated by Jones; claims 4 and 5 are obvious over Jones; the Globalhanger disclosure was made under conditions of confidence and does not invalidate the patent claims.

Court Disposition

Patent claims 1, 4, and 5 are invalid due to anticipation and obviousness; Globalhanger disclosure does not affect validity due to confidentiality.