Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company v Plastus Kreativ AB

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1995
Year1995
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
23 cases
  • Point Solutions Ltd v Focus Business Solutions Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 16 Diciembre 2005
    ...Equipment) Ltd [1990] RPC 293 Patten -v—Burke Publishing [1991] 1 WLR 541 Plastus Kreativ AB -v—Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co [1995] RPC 438 Wyko Group Plc -v—Cooper Roller Bearings [1996] FSR 126 Messier-Dowty -v—Sabena [2000] 1WLR 2004 L'Oreal -v—Johnson & Johnson [2000] FSR 686......
  • Lucasfilm Ltd v Ainsworth
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 31 Julio 2008
    ...territorial in nature.” 244 He went on to cite the decision of Aldous J in Plastus Kreativ AB v Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co [1995] RPC 438 at 447 in which Aldous J said the same sort of thing and declined to draw a distinction between validity and infringement: “Also a conclusion ......
  • Griggs Group Ltd v Evans
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 12 Mayo 2004
    ...foreign state. This, conceivably, may annoy the citizens of that state. See Plastus Kreativ AB v. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co [1995] RPC 438 at 447 per Aldous J. But however true that may be, it is not in any meaningful sense analogous to our case. 133 On the other hand, in one se......
  • Chugai Pharmaceutical Company Ltd v UCB Pharma SA
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 26 Mayo 2017
    ...660 at p.669) and "no man can infringe an invalid patent" (per Aldous J in Plastus Kreativ AB v Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co [1995] R.P.C. 438 at p.447) the second meaning is apparent. On the other hand MedImmune's application to the US court for a declaration that Synagis "does no......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • IP Bulletin - Spring 2013
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq United Kingdom
    • 11 Abril 2013
    ...jurisdiction over questions of infringement of foreign patents (following Plastus Kreativ AB v Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. [1995] RPC 438 at Actavis submitted several arguments as to why the claims should not be determined by the national courts: this was not a conventional forum......
3 books & journal articles

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