Patent decision

BL number

O/156/13

Concerning rights in

EP0800407

Hearing Officer

Mr A C Howard

Decision date

16 April 2013

Person(s) or Company(s) involved

Airscience Technology International Ltd v Wallenius Water AB

Provisions discussed

Patents Act 1977 section 107(4), Patents Rules 2007, rules 74(2), 85(1)

Keywords

Costs, Estoppel, Stay of proceedings

Related Decisions

None

Summary

The defendant/patentee in this action for revocation submitted that the claimant should be estopped from continuing on the grounds that invalidity had already been put at issue in two previous proceedings. An order for security for costs against the claimant was also requested. The claimant resisted the patentee’s request that the main proceedings should be stayed pending resolution of the question of estoppel. The hearing officer, in granting the requested stay, decided that it would be in the interests of saving costs and fairness between the parties for the question of estoppel to be dealt with first. The request for security for costs was refused because there was not sufficient reason to believe that the claimant ( a company) will be unable to pay the patentee’s costs if ordered to do so. The parties were given the opportunity to indicate whether they would be content for a decision on the estoppel issue to be made on the papers, or if an oral hearing was desired.