British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
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 >>
Keith Dixon Roche; Oil Gas Installations Limited; and Pipeflex Limited v NV Kakaert SA; Luc Bourgois; Ludo Adriaensen; and Daniel Mauer (Patent) [2006] UKIntelP o36606 (14 December 2006)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2006/o36606.html
Cite as:
[2006] UKIntelP o36606
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
Keith Dixon Roche; Oil Gas Installations Limited; and Pipeflex Limited v NV Kakaert SA; Luc Bourgois; Ludo Adriaensen; and Daniel Mauer [2006] UKIntelP o36606 (14 December 2006)
For the whole decision click here: o36606
Patent decision
- BL number
- O/366/06
- Concerning rights in
- EP 1350049
- Hearing Officer
- Mr D J Barford
- Decision date
- 14 December 2006
- Person(s) or Company(s) involved
- Keith Dixon Roche; Oil & Gas Installations Limited; and Pipeflex Limited v NV Kakaert SA; Luc Bourgois; Ludo Adriaensen; and Daniel Mauer
- Provisions discussed
- PA 1977 sections 13, 37,
- Keywords
- Entitlement, Inventorship, Jurisdiction, Stay of proceedings
- Related Decisions
- None
Summary
The claimants have launched entitlement proceedings in Belgium (where the defendants are based) with a view to the court there determining the entitlement issue in respect of all the European patent family members. In case the court in Belgium decides that it does not have the necessary jurisdiction, the claimants have also initiated entitlement actions in the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy in respect of corresponding equivalents.
All parties have requested a stay -referring to European Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction, However the hearing officer was content to order a stay, pending decision by the court in Belgium, simply on the basis that there is no dispute over a stay and there is no public interest consideration to take into account.