For the whole decision click here: o25502
Summary
The claimant gave details of the invention confidentially to the defendant, who subsequently filed a patent application (the earlier application). This was published but later terminated. The claimant had also filed an application but at a later date than the defendant (the later application).
Held that, since the earlier application formed part of the state of the art in respect of the later application, the later application could not proceed without significant amendment. The comptrollers discretion under section 8(3) was therefore exercised in the claimants favour allowing the claimant to file a new application for all or part of the matter in the earlier application, and taking the filing date thereof.
Third party terms were imposed for actions begun during the period between the termination of the earlier application and the making of the section 8 reference. The fact that the claimants own application was published before termination of the earlier application was announced was held not to be material.