Watson, Laidlaw, & Co., Ltd. v. Pott, Cassels, & Williamson [1913] ScotLR 525 (14 March 1913)

Watson, Laidlaw, & Co., Ltd. v. Pott, Cassels, & Williamson [1913] ScotLR 525 (14 March 1913)

The proper measure of damages is the profit the patentee would have made on the infringing sales, subject to deductions for sales not attributable to the patent or due to the infringer's efforts, and possible increases for proven loss from price reductions. On the evidence, the patentee's loss was at least £3000, and the lower award of £1500 was unjustified and inadequately reasoned.

Citation
[1913] ScotLR 525
Parties
Pursuer: Watson, Laidlaw, & Company, Limited; Defender: Pott, Cassels, & Williamson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 March 1913
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Damages / Appeal/review of Damages Assessment After House of Lords Affirmed Liability
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; damages increased.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Damages, Measure of Damages
Intellectual Property Commercial Law Patent Infringement Damages Measure of Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Watson, Laidlaw, & Company, Limited

Pursuer

Pott, Cassels, & Williamson

Defender

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Damages / Appeal/review of Damages Assessment After House of Lords Affirmed Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the proper measure of damages for patent infringement where the patentee has not granted licences?
  2. 2 Should damages be based on the infringer's profits, the patentee's lost profits, or a reasonable royalty?
  3. 3 What deductions or increases are appropriate in assessing damages for patent infringement?

Ratio Decidendi

The proper measure of damages is the profit the patentee would have made on the infringing sales, subject to deductions for sales not attributable to the patent or due to the infringer's efforts, and possible increases for proven loss from price reductions. On the evidence, the patentee's loss was at least £3000, and the lower award of £1500 was unjustified and inadequately reasoned.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; damages increased.

Orders

  • Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled.
  • Defenders ordained to pay pursuers £3000 in damages.