UK Supreme Court set for DABUS appeal

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

UK Supreme Court set for DABUS appeal

AI and human.jpeg

The UK’s top court will rule on whether the country’s patent law requires an inventor to be a human after an influential judge gave the DABUS team hope last year

The UK Supreme Court will hear a keenly awaited appeal over whether an artificial intelligence tool can be named as the inventor on a patent application tomorrow, March 2.

The hearing, which Managing IP will report live from, is the culmination of a legal campaign led by computer scientist Stephen Thaler and lawyer and academic Ryan Abbott.

Thaler and Abbott, who are part of an organisation called the Artificial Inventor Project, want the court to recognise the AI tool DABUS as the inventor of a patent covering a food storage system.

The project has filed patent applications in major jurisdictions naming DABUS, which was developed by Thaler, as the inventor.

Both the England and Wales High Court and Court of Appeal, as well as the UKIPO, said that UK patent law requires a natural person to be named as the inventor.

In its September 2021 judgment, the Court of Appeal voted 2-1 to reject the DABUS case.

But a dissenting opinion from the influential intellectual property judge Lord Justice Colin Birss gave a glimmer of hope to the DABUS case.

Birss said Thaler had met the requirements set out in the UK Patents Act 1977 by identifying whom he believed to be the inventor.

However, Birss did not comment more generally on whether the law should recognise machines as inventors.

An Australian judge did give a more explicit endorsement of the DABUS team’s position in a landmark Federal Court judgment issued in July 2021 but that finding was overturned last November.

Managing IP will attend the Supreme Court and report on the proceedings tomorrow.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article