Skip Navigation


Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Advance Access originally published online on April 23, 2009
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases 2009 126(6):363-406; doi:10.1093/rpc/rcp021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
126/6/363    most recent
rcp021v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Crown Copyright

[2009] R.P.C. 12

Kelly and Chiu v Ge Healthcare Ltd

Patents Court

(Floyd J.) 3-5, 8-11, 15, 16 December 2008 and 11 February 2009

[2009] EWHC 181 (Pat); [2009] R.P.C. 12

Patent—Employee invention—Inventor compensation—Causal relationship between patent and ‘outstanding benefit’—Whether ‘other protection’ included regulatory data exclusivity—Meaning of ‘compensation’—Whether assessment of valuation of benefit ex post facto or ex ante —Whether patents of outstanding benefit to employer—Evaluating the benefit—Statutory factors to be taken into account—Fair share of benefit—Comparable licences


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.