|Merpel still thinks we're taking|
about g-nomes, not genomes ...
"IssueThe IPKat's good friend Robert Hurst has just told him that this hearing -- which began yesterday and is scheduled to finish tomorrow -- can be viewed live via the Supreme Court website here. If you are lucky you may catch a glimpse or two of that popular star of stage and screen Simon Thorley QC elaborating on the bases of Human Genome Sciences Inc's appeal.
Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to apply principles of law established by the European Patent Office in relation to article 57 of the European Patent Convention, thereby wrongly concluding that the patent in suit was invalid because the specification did not disclose an invention capable of industrial application.
The appellant is the proprietor of European Patent (UK) 0 939 804 in respect of a protein, Neutrokine-α, identified as a member of the THF ligand superfamily. The respondent commenced proceedings both in the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office and in the High Court for the revocation of the patent. The Court of Appeal upheld the order of the High Court revoking the patent, whereas the appeal against the revocation order in the European Patent Office was allowed".
Merpel notes that, of the five judges in the Supreme Court, three (Lords Neuberger, Walker and Collins) have had some genuine experience of hearing patent cases in their earlier lives. Is three out of five a new British record, she wonders?
Politically topical footnote: this service is brought to us by Sky News. This service is owned by British Sky Broadcasting (in which Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation owns a controlling 39.1% stake. It is also partially owned by ... News Corporation.