30 Sept 1997
TANASHIN DENKI CO. LTD. v. KING LONG INDUSTRIAL LTD.
- Citation
- TANASHIN DENKI CO. LTD. v. KING LONG INDUSTRIAL LTD.
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA7658/1995
Claim 1 is valid because the invention as a whole involves an inventive step: a skilled but unimaginative person at the priority date would not have been led to discard the conventional high speed gearing and combine the auto-reverse mechanism with the ordinary winding drive to achieve RTS; the defendant failed to prove the s.81 innocence defence as it did not establish lack of knowledge or reasonable grounds to suppose the patent existed.