header-logo header-logo

30 January 2015
Issue: 7638 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Patent

Jarden Consumer Solutions (Europe) Ltd v SEB SA [2014] EWCA Civ 1629, [2015] All ER (D) 22 (Jan)

The defendant (and first CPR Pt 20 claimant) and the second CPR Pt 20 claimant brought proceedings against the claimant in respect of infringement of the patent for a dry fryer. The judge held, inter alia, that claims 10, 11 and 13 of the patent were valid and had been infringed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant’s appeal on the main construction point. It held, inter alia, that the judge had been wrong to conclude that the main heater means mounted on the main body referred to in claim 9 of the patent could include a “main heater means” mounted in the lid.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll