Vacuum cleaner maker Dyson has pocketed over £4 million ($6.24 million) in a settlement with rival Hoover. The settlement - £4 million plus costs and interest - comes just weeks before the High Court was due to decide what level of damages should be awarded against Hoover.
Hoover's triple-vortex vacuum cleaner was found to have infringed Dyson's patented dual-cyclone cleaner back in October 2000. The damages hearing was set for October 21 this year, following an unsuccessful appeal by Hoover.
But Hoover pre-empted the hearing by making a payment into court, which was accepted by Dyson on October 4. The patent in question expired last year.
Dyson's dual cyclone vacuum cleaners retail for around £250, so the award equates to about 16,000 individual sales.
Martin Bowen, general counsel of Dyson, said: "My overall goal was to ensure that the infringement was stopped as soon as possible, and the right message was sent out to the industry."
Bowen said that Dyson is prepared to defend its IP vigorusly: "We have a rigorous regime of monitoring competitor activity, and every bagless product is comprehensively assessed." He added that deciding to go to court was not a difficult choice to make: "It was our core patent in our dual-cyclone stable of patents. If there was ever a case to fight, it would be this one."
Andrew Inglis, a partner of Olswang in London, represented Dyson. He said: "The technology was completely ground-breaking. James Dyson [the company's founder] was strongly committed to defending the company's IP rights. It shows that you have to be prepared to take the matter all the way."
The dual-cyclone vacuum cleaner has proved one of the most successful UK inventions in recent years. It was launched in 1993, and Dyson now has over 50% of the market for upright vacuum cleaners in the UK.
The Dyson damages represent one of the largest ever reported awards in the UK. However, many patent cases are settled following an infringement hearing, and the amount of damages agreed is never disclosed.
Bowen said the whole case had proved "extremely expensive": "A company with less resources would balk at the cost and that is something that needs to be looked at."
Hoover was represented by Denis Hannon of Weightman Vizards in Liverpool.
