Rolawn Ltd and Others v Turfmech Machinery Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Neutral Citation[2008] EWHC 989 (Pat)
Date2008
Year2008
CourtChancery 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
14 cases
  • Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Apple Inc. (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 18 October 2012
    ...judgment of Arnold J at first instance in Dyson v Vax [2010] FSR 39 and his reference there to the observations of Mann J in Rolawn Ltd v Turfmech Machinery Ltd [2008] EWHC 989 (Pat); [2008] R.P.C. 27 (paragraph 123, 125 and 126). As Mann J said, " one of the problems with words is that i......
  • (1) Cantel Medical (UK) Ltd v ARC Medical Design Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 23 February 2018
    ...[2014] EWHC 4242 (Pat); [2016] FSR 5, at [41] and the second is drawn from Mann J's judgment in Rolawn Ltd v Turfmech Machinery Ltd [2008] EWHC 989 (Pat); [2008] RPC 27, at [79]–[80] and [93]–[94]. 222 I don't think it matters here. Unregistered design right subsists in the design of an ar......
  • Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors Group
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 21 January 2009
    ...of the time, skill and effort expended by the author of design on the creation of his work.” What is a design? 24 In Rolawn Ltd v Turfmech Machinery [2008] RPC 27§ 79 Mann J pointed out that: “It is important to isolate the design in respect of which protection can be properly claimed, and ......
  • G-Star Raw CV (a company incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands) v Rhodi Ltd and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 6 February 2015
    ...of the time, skill and effort expended by the author of design on the creation of his work." What is a design? 30 In Rolawn Ltd v Turfmech Machinery [2008] RPC 27 Mann J said at [79]: "It is important to isolate the design in respect of which protection can be properly claimed, and it is vi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • European IP Bulletin, Issue 82, July 2011
    • European Union
    • Mondaq European Union
    • 5 August 2011
    ...and in addition said that no design right subsisted. SUBSISTENCE A Method of Construction Following Rowlawn Ltd v Turfmech [2008] EWHC 989 (Pat), the judge found that the exclusion of design right subsisting in a method or principle of construction operated to limit the generality of the de......

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