Lux Traffic Controls Ltd v Pike Signals Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1993 |
| Year | 1993 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- 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
50 cases
- Generics (UK) Ltd v Daiichi Pharmaceutical Company Ltd (Costs)
- Kavanagh Balloons Pty Ltd v Cameron Balloons Ltd
-
Autostore Technology as v Ocado Group Plc
...is whether the information was made available, not whether it was accessed by anyone, see Lux Traffic Controls Ltd v Pike Signals Ltd [1993] RPC 107, at 133. It is not even relevant whether any person would have realised that the information was available. In Unilin Beheer BV v Berry Floor ......
- Jupiters Ltd v Neurizon Pty Ltd
Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
-
High Court Finds That Unobserved Trial Of Seed Drill Machinery In A Field Next To A Public Footpath Rendered The Patent Relating To The Invention Invalid For Prior Use
...HHJ Hacon noted the essential principles governing a claim to prior disclosure, as set out in Lux Traffic Controls Ltd v Pike Signals Ltd [1993] RPC 107: "It is settled law that to invalidate a patent a disclosure has to be what has been called an enabling disclosure. That is to say the dis......
2 books & journal articles
-
INTERPRETING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STATUTES IN SINGAPORE
...– this is the unread “book-in-a-dark-and-dusty-corner-of-the-library” principle espoused in Lux Traffic Controls Ltd v Pike Signals Ltd[1993] RPC 107 at 133. 23First Currency Choice Pte Ltd v Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd[2008] 1 SLR(R) 335 at [38]. 24First Currency Choice Pte Ltd v Main......
-
The innocent bystander problem in the patenting of higher life forms.
...as the defendant should have been aware of the possible existence of a patent. In Lux Traffic Ltd. v. Pike Signals and Faronwise Ltd. ([1993] R.P.C. 107 (Pat. Ct.)), the defendant successfully argued innocent infringement, even though it appears that the defendant may have copied the invent......