BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Glasgow School of Art v Saquib Ibrahim (Patent) [2004] UKIntelP o37704 (29 December 2004) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o37704.html Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o37704 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o37704
Summary
The claimant, having seen the title of the unpublished application, believed that the defendant was seeking to patent an invention relating to a concept which they were actively researching and which belonged to them by virtue of the defendants employment as a researcher. The defendant denied both these allegations, but withdrew from the proceedings after the claimants had filed evidence, without filing evidence of his own. He said this was in the light of the official search report on the application, and maintained the case set out in his counter-statement. In a decision on the papers, the hearing officer found that the claimant entitled to the application and ordered it to proceed in their name, with publication remaining stayed until the claimant had been given a period to decide whether they wanted to continue with the application.
The hearing officer awarded costs on the standard scale, notwithstanding submissions (i) from the defendant that his costs in prosecuting the application should be offset against any award to the claimant, and (ii) from the claimant that off-scale costs were justified because of the defendants refusal to provide details of the invention to them confidentially, thus necessitating the entitlement proceedings, and his lack of expedition at various stages in the proceedings.
