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 >> Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc (Patent) [2006] UKIntelP o34506 (14 December 2006) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2006/o34506.html Cite as: [2006] UKIntelP o34506 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o34506
Summary
The defendant sought security for costs, alleging reason to believe that L Ltd, the company of which P (the claimant identified on Form 2/77) was a director, might be unable to meet any costs. P indicated that insistence on security might enforce withdrawal and thought this would prevent the filing of evidence, contrary to the public interest. The hearing officer recognised that the likely strength of the claimant’s case might be a factor in deciding whether to order security and that this would be difficult to assess in this case without further evidence - as would any consideration ex parte by the comptroller in the public interest if the claimant withdrew. He suggested that a written opinion by the Patent Office might assist in these circumstances and stayed the proceedings for 6 weeks to allow the parties to consider this. (If the proceedings did eventually continue it should be clarified whether P or L Ltd was the claimant.)
