Lubrizol Corporation v Esso Petroleum Company Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1998
Year1998
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
43 cases
3 books & journal articles
  • THE USE OF EXPERTS IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN SINGAPORE INVOLVING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • 1 Diciembre 2013
    ...Singapore Academy of Law, Report of the Law Reform Committee on Opinion Evidence (October 2011) at paras 13–36. 8Lubrizol v Esso Petroleum[1998] RPC 727 (CA) at 738, per Aldous LJ. 9 Section 80 of the Patents Act (Cap 221, 2005 Rev Ed). 10 Cap 221, 2005 Rev Ed. 11 Section 25(4) of the Paten......
  • Intellectual Property Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2007, December 2007
    • 1 Diciembre 2007
    ...necessary to specify the attributes of such a person in a given case. This is because, as Aldous LJ explained in Lubrizol v Esso Petroleum[1998] RPC 727 at 738: [T]he court must adopt the mantle of the notional skilled addressee and determine, from the language used, what the notional skill......
  • INTERPRETING PATENT CLAIMS: SOME THOUGHTS ON THE UK KIRIN-AMGEN DECISION
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2006, December 2006
    • 1 Diciembre 2006
    ...the court to steer the correct course between Scylla and Charybdis.” 31 Supra n 4, at [47]. 32 See Lubrizol Corp v Esso Petroleum Co Ltd[1998] RPC 727 at 738: Patent specifications are intended to be read by persons skilled in the relevant art, but their construction is for the Court. Thus,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT