InternationalUSRemember you can easily switch between MIP US and MIP International at any time

United Kingdom: A new approach to patent infringement




In a landmark decision on patent infringement (Actavis UK Limited v Eli Lilly & Company [2017] UKSC 48), the Supreme Court has confirmed that UK law does provide for a doctrine of equivalents when determining the scope of patent protection.

Prior to this decision, determining the issue of infringement in the UK required a "purposive" construction of the patent claims. In any purposive construction, the courts would establish the meaning of the claim language in the eyes of the skilled person, before deciding whether any alleged infringement fell within the scope of this meaning. If an alleged infringement was outside of this scope, there would be no infringement.

In other words, the language of the patent was considered to be of critical importance and, if the language of a claim could not be construed to extend to an equivalent, this equivalent did not represent an infringement. However, in the approach established by this recent decision, infringement may now arise even when the specific language of a claim would not be understood as extending to the alleged equivalent.

The Supreme Court judgment helpfully sets out guidance for determining whether there is infringement in such circumstances. In simple terms, for an equivalent to represent an infringement, the equivalent must obviously achieve the same result in the same way as the invention in the eyes of the skilled person when viewed at the priority date. Additionally, the skilled person must conclude there was no requirement for strict compliance with the literal meaning of the relevant claims. If these conditions are satisfied, the equivalent will represent an infringement.

While this most recent decision in July 2017 represents a new approach for the UK courts, this refreshed approach to equivalents is closely aligned with that taken by the German and Dutch courts. Accordingly, this decision can certainly be viewed as an attempt to align the interpretation of infringement across Europe before the first cases at the new Unified Patent Court.

Chapman
Helga Chapman

Chapman + Co
Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys
Chapman IP, Kings Park House, 22 Kings Park Road
Southampton SO15 2AT, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 23 8000 2022 
info@chapmanip.com  
www.chapmanip.com


Comments






profile

Managing IP

ManagingIP

ManagingIP profile

Come visit the Managing IP team at booth 131 at #INTA2018. We have the IP STARS trademark handbook, the latest MIP… https://t.co/9RV9VpiUWd

May 20 2018 06:57 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

UK publishes Trade Secrets Regulations 2018 https://t.co/aujzXPhn3H Main change from draft is introduction of a new… https://t.co/d0FSbTiVMF

May 18 2018 04:29 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

In a two-part series on patent marking, Binal Patel and Kirk Sigmon of @BannerWitcoff discuss "Steering clear of fi… https://t.co/ypN5OhxbzG

May 18 2018 04:10 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
More from the Managing IP blog


null null null

null null null

May 2018

Technology alters the anti-counterfeiting landscape

Ellie Mertens reveals evolving technologies are changing the counterfeiting game on both sides, as a tool for both prevention and evasion



Most read articles

Supplements