SNE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER

SNE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER

The court held that a defendant may apply to strike out a patent infringement claim but the strike‑out application must succeed only in plain and obvious cases; here it was not plain and obvious that the patent was invalid on the material before the court (factual and technical disputes, possible confidentiality of disclosures and need for expert evidence), therefore the 1st defendant's strike‑out application was dismissed and the matter must proceed to trial.

Citation
SNE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: SNE Engineering Co. Ltd.; 1st Defendant: Hsin Chong Construction Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 October 2012
Case Number
HCA1466/2012
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement / Pre‑trial Strike‑out Application (application to Strike Out Statement of Claim; Early Trial Directions Issued)
Outcome
The 1st defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim was dismissed; the matter to proceed to trial under earlier directions; order nisi for costs in favour of plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Novelty, Prior Disclosure, Prior Use, Validity of Patent, Strike‑out Procedure, Confidentiality, Injunctions
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Novelty Prior Disclosure Prior Use Validity of Patent Strike‑out Procedure +2 more

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

SNE Engineering Co. Ltd.

Plaintiff

Hsin Chong Construction Company Limited

1st Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement / Pre‑trial Strike‑out Application (application to Strike Out Statement of Claim; Early Trial Directions Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a defendant in a patent infringement action may apply to strike out the statement of claim
  2. 2 Whether the patent lacked novelty as at filing date (4 August 2011) by reason of prior disclosure/publication or prior use
  3. 3 Whether summary dismissal is appropriate (plain and obvious failure) and whether a mini‑trial on affidavits is permissible

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a defendant may apply to strike out a patent infringement claim but the strike‑out application must succeed only in plain and obvious cases; here it was not plain and obvious that the patent was invalid on the material before the court (factual and technical disputes, possible confidentiality of disclosures and need for expert evidence), therefore the 1st defendant's strike‑out application was dismissed and the matter must proceed to trial.

Court Disposition

The 1st defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim was dismissed; the matter to proceed to trial under earlier directions; order nisi for costs in favour of plaintiff.

Orders

  • Dismissed the 1st defendant's strike‑out application
  • Made an order nisi that the 1st defendant pay the plaintiff the costs of the strike‑out application