Mead Corporation and Another v Riverwood Multiple Packaging Division of Riverwood International Corporation and Others

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date05 March 1997
Date05 March 1997
CourtChancery Division

Chancery Division

Before Mr Justice Laddie

Mead Corporation and Another
and
Riverwood Multiple Packaging Division of Riverwood International Corporation and Others

Patents - proceedings for infringement - joinder improper without evidence

Joinder improper without evidence

The court had to be satisfied that there were proper grounds for alleging that foreign parties were actually involved in taking part in primary acts of infringement in the court's jurisdiction before exposing them to the expense and inconvenience of joinder in proceedings for infringement: a mere subsidiary relationship would not suffice.

Mr Justice Laddie so held in the Chancery Division, in granting an application by Riverwood International Corporation ("RIC") a company incorporated in the USA, that its name be stricken from a writ and statement of claim issued by The Mead Corporation and Mead Packaging Ltd, the plaintiffs, who sought to join as co-defendants Riverwood International Ltd ("RI") and New Materials Ltd ("NM"), two UK-resident subsidiaries of RIC.

Mr Guy Tritton for the plaintiffs; Mr George Hamer for the defendants.

MR JUSTICE LADDIE said that it was not in dispute that one or both of RI and NM had committed acts in the United Kingdom alleged to have constituted primary infringements of the first plaintiff's patent; and since it was no longer alleged that RIC had itself committed such acts, the single issue was whether RI/NM's acts had arguably been committed in furtherance of a common design between them and RIC.

The plaintiffs had relied on statements in RIC's annual report for 1994 to the effect that RIC was a "global" company offering a "one-source solution linked...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
1 books & journal articles
  • Civil Procedure
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2000, December 2000
    • 1 Diciembre 2000
    ...was why. according to the Court of Appeal, cases like Mead Corp v Riverwood Multiple Packaging Division of Riverwood International Corp [1997] FSR 484, Coin Controls Ltd v Suzo International (UK) Ltd[1999] Ch 33, Aubrey Max Sandman v Panasonic UK Limited[1998] FSR 651 and Napp Pharmaceutica......

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