Danisco A/S v Novozymes A/S (No 2)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Neutral Citation | [2012] EWHC 389 (Pat) |
| Date | 2012 |
| Year | 2012 |
| Court | Chancery Division (Patents Court) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
Aqua Global Solutions Ltd v Fiserv (Europe) Ltd
...is the virtue of coyness?" 20 Mr Burgess, who appeared for the Defendant, relies on the first instance decision of Morgan J in Danisco A/S v Novozymes A/S (No. 2) [2012] FSR 22. This was a claim in the Patents Court in which the claimant applied for the revocation of a patent. The regime fo......
-
National Crime Agency v Abacha
...that the right to inspect was not "unfettered". The Judge had earlier (at [24]) made reference to the decision of Morgan J in Danisco A/S v Novozymes A/S (No. 2) [2012] EWHC 389 (Pat), especially at [72] – [73], as authority for the proposition that the court had an inherent jurisdiction to......
-
Ward Hadaway v DB (UK) Bank
...disclosure on the grounds that it is not necessary for the fair disposal of the action: Danisco A/S v Novozymes A/S [2012] EWHC 389 (Pat) [2012] FSR 22." 39 That statement, if it is an accurate report of what was decided, again commits what one must take to be a solecism in referring to "di......
-
National Crime Agency v Abacha
...if it is not necessary for the fair disposal of the action. In that context the NCA refers to the decision of Morgan J in Danisco A/S against Novozymes A/S (No. 2) [2012] FSR 22, at paragraphs 72 to 73. It is submitted that there are very good reasons why the court should not require the do......