Promotion for Patents Court judge

It is with the greatest pleasure that the IPKat announces the elevation of The Honourable Mr Justice Pumfrey (right, as usual), one of the Patents Court judges for England and Wales, to the Court of Appeal.

Sir Nicholas, 56, was called to the Bar by the Middle Temple in 1975 and became a Bencher in 1998. Appointed a Queen's Counsel in 1990, he was Junior Counsel to Her Majesty's Treasury (Patents) from 1987 to 1990.

The IPKat reminds his readers of some of Sir Nicholas's recent decisions:
* Triumph Actuation Systems LLC v Aeroquip-Vickers Ltd and another [2007] EWHC 1367 (Pat) on patent amendments (see IPKat here);

* Miss World Ltd v Channel 4 on trade marks versus free speech (the IPKat's not sure this one's right, though);

* Cappellini's and Bloomberg's applications, on patentability and excluded subject-matter (see IPKat post here);

* Baxter v Abbott (on patents and insults, as the IPKat explains here).
The learned judge is a popular and approachable member of the British IP fraternity. His interests include sailing and he is believed to possess a particular affinity for the pedalo.
Promotion for Patents Court judge Promotion for Patents Court judge Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, July 06, 2007 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. Does this mean that Robin Jacob can be given a break? It must be very hard on him, having to give the ECJ the answer every time he asks it a question.


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.