The document summarizes a case involving patent revocation proceedings between Enercon India Ltd. and Dr. Alloys Wobben. It discusses that Enercon India filed multiple revocation petitions against Wobben's patents after their license agreement was terminated. The IPAB partially revoked one of Wobben's patents. Wobben then alleged abuse of process in the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court found that Enercon India cannot simultaneously pursue counter claims in court and revocation petitions before the IPAB due to an earlier consent order. It also clarified that a post-grant opposition eclipses rights to file revocation petitions or counter claims under Section 64(1) of the Patents Act.
ADM Jabalpur V. Shivkant Shukla Case PresesntationJaimin Joshi
I studied this case very briefly because I have to make ppt presentation on this topic. This case is deals with Art.21 as well as with MISA Act,1973.
This case is Landmark case with respect to Indian Constitution.
ADM Jabalpur V. Shivkant Shukla Case PresesntationJaimin Joshi
I studied this case very briefly because I have to make ppt presentation on this topic. This case is deals with Art.21 as well as with MISA Act,1973.
This case is Landmark case with respect to Indian Constitution.
Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996Legal
Section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, jurisdiction, powers, court, local, international, judgments, supreme court, high court, powers, interim, time limit, amendment 2015
Cpc learning module 4 appearance, examination and trialDr. Vikas Khakare
This contains provisions as to appearance of parties before court, effects of appearance, non appearance, adjournment, examination by court, issue of commission, arrest before judgment, attachment before judgment, appointment of receiver, interest and cost.
Res subjudice • Section 10 contains doctrine of res subjudice. • ‘Res’ means a subject matter against which legal proceeding has been instituted and ‘subjudice’ means a case under trial or under judgment. • Section states that, the Court shall not proceed with the trial of suit in which: • i.The matter in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties; • ii.Where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India.
Definitions under Code of Civil Procedure.pptxAaradhyaMandloi
This is a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation on "Definitions under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908". The content in this presentation is accumulated after thorough research on the topic from various sources (Includes notes from a textbook on CPC by C.K. Takwani).
Kindly share it with your peers if you like the content in the PPT.
Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996Legal
Section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, jurisdiction, powers, court, local, international, judgments, supreme court, high court, powers, interim, time limit, amendment 2015
Cpc learning module 4 appearance, examination and trialDr. Vikas Khakare
This contains provisions as to appearance of parties before court, effects of appearance, non appearance, adjournment, examination by court, issue of commission, arrest before judgment, attachment before judgment, appointment of receiver, interest and cost.
Res subjudice • Section 10 contains doctrine of res subjudice. • ‘Res’ means a subject matter against which legal proceeding has been instituted and ‘subjudice’ means a case under trial or under judgment. • Section states that, the Court shall not proceed with the trial of suit in which: • i.The matter in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties; • ii.Where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India.
Definitions under Code of Civil Procedure.pptxAaradhyaMandloi
This is a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation on "Definitions under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908". The content in this presentation is accumulated after thorough research on the topic from various sources (Includes notes from a textbook on CPC by C.K. Takwani).
Kindly share it with your peers if you like the content in the PPT.
Un-Reasoned Order May Invoke Writ Jurisdiction Of Indian Court.pdfLS Davar & Co.
As per the doctrine of audi alteram partem, the Controllers of the Indian Patent Office are bound to pass a speaking order while disposing off a patent application i.e., the Controllers shall provide detailed reason for granting or rejecting the patent application.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has no power to stay prosecution of taxpayers i...D Murali ☆
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has no power to stay prosecution of taxpayers in respect of matters in appeal before it - T. N. Pandey - Article published in Business Advisor, dated November 10, 2016 - http://www.magzter.com/IN/Shrinikethan/Business-Advisor/Business/
A Monthly Newsletter by Takeover Team of Corporate Professionals.
Highlights of this edition:-
SAT order in the matter of Mr. Hemant Kothari, Mr. Rajesh Kothari, Mr. Dharmendra Kothari, Mrs. Ichraj Devi Kothari and Mrs. Sunita Kothari
SAT order in the matter ofMr. Vilas Valunji, Mr. Partha Debnath,
Mr. Janardhan Shriniwas Purandare and Mr. V. A. Norhi
Consent Order in the matter of M/s. Count N Denier (India) Limited
Consent Order in the matter of M/s. Macor Packaging Limited
Exemption Order in the matter of M/s. Sarla Performance Limited
Adjudicating Officer/WTM Orders
Regular Section- Automatic Exemption from Open Offer
Powerpoint for New York State Bar LectureLaina Chan
Powerpoint used in the lecture on 29 October 2014 to the New York State Bar presented at Hinshaw & Culbertson on the Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards in the Asia Pacific. An event supported by the International Subcommittees for International Arbitration, Insurance and Reinsurance as well as the Chinese American Bar Association
In 2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs established a committee led by Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh, former Vice Chancellor of National Law University (NLU), Delhi. This committee was tasked with reviewing the three codes of criminal law. The primary objective of the committee was to propose comprehensive reforms to the country’s criminal laws in a manner that is both principled and effective.
The committee’s focus was on ensuring the safety and security of individuals, communities, and the nation as a whole. Throughout its deliberations, the committee aimed to uphold constitutional values such as justice, dignity, and the intrinsic value of each individual. Their goal was to recommend amendments to the criminal laws that align with these values and priorities.
Subsequently, in February, the committee successfully submitted its recommendations regarding amendments to the criminal law. These recommendations are intended to serve as a foundation for enhancing the current legal framework, promoting safety and security, and upholding the constitutional principles of justice, dignity, and the inherent worth of every individual.
A "File Trademark" is a legal term referring to the registration of a unique symbol, logo, or name used to identify and distinguish products or services. This process provides legal protection, granting exclusive rights to the trademark owner, and helps prevent unauthorized use by competitors.
Visit Now: https://www.tumblr.com/trademark-quick/751620857551634432/ensure-legal-protection-file-your-trademark-with?source=share
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
How to Obtain Permanent Residency in the NetherlandsBridgeWest.eu
You can rely on our assistance if you are ready to apply for permanent residency. Find out more at: https://immigration-netherlands.com/obtain-a-permanent-residence-permit-in-the-netherlands/.
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
Car Accident Injury Do I Have a Case....Knowyourright
Every year, thousands of Minnesotans are injured in car accidents. These injuries can be severe – even life-changing. Under Minnesota law, you can pursue compensation through a personal injury lawsuit.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...Finlaw Consultancy Pvt Ltd
Introduction-
The process of register multi-state cooperative society in India is governed by the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. This process requires the office bearers to undertake several crucial responsibilities to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. The key office bearers typically include the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, along with other elected members of the managing committee. Their responsibilities encompass administrative, legal, and financial duties essential for the successful registration and operation of the society.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...
Dr. Alloys Wobben vs Enercon India Ltd..pptx
1. Enercon (India) Ltd Vs. Alloys Wobben
(Patent No. IN200549)
REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS
Prepared By
Gurpal Singh
IN/PA-2732
2. Brief Intro
1. Enercon GmbH is a German company engaged in
manufacture of Wind Turbines, owned by Dr. Alloys Wobben
who owns several Indian patents.
2. JV with Yogesh Mehra and Ajay Mehra under the name of
Enercon India Ltd.
3. License agreement terminated in 2008 due to non-fulfilment
of certain obligations.
4. Enercon India Files nineteen revocation petitions before the
IPAB.
5. Dr. Wobben files ten infringement suits before Delhi HC.
6. Enercon India files four more revocation petition taking the
total to twenty three. And files counter claim seeking
revocation in response to infringement suits.
4. First Independent Claim
1. A wind power installation comprises a rotor with a rotor hub with
at least two rotor blades which are rotatable about the
longitudinal axis; an adjusting device for individually adjusting a
rotor blade to a desired blade setting angle; a generator which is
operatively connected to the rotor; said rotor hub is provided with
measurement means for ascertaining at least one of the
instantaneous mechanical loading of the hub or a rotor blade,
control means for ascertaining a blade angle position which is
wanted for the reduction in the instantaneous loading using a
variation in the instantaneous blade angle position of at least one
rotor blade and which suitably adjust the rotor blade to the
desired blade angle position by the adjusting device
asynchronously from the blade angle position of other rotor
blades; and said adjusting device and said measuring means being
connected to the control means.
7. Prior Art
European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition (EWEC) 96
(Dynamic Load Models for HAWTs)
8. IPAB
Question IPAB’s Take
Locus-standi of the applicant
to move the revocation
application as a “person
interested” under S.64 of the
Patents Act, 1970.
If the applicant succeeds in demolishing the
patent in accordance with law, then the
infringement suit must fail and the
applicant’s commercial interest will be
secured. Therefore, the applicant herein
passes the test of Ajay Industrial Corporation
case.
Licensee Estoppel As per the Section 140 of the act and the
views held by United States Supreme Court, a
licensee cannot be stopped from challenging
the validity of the patent.
Anticipation and
Obviousness
Partially anticipated by GB’247 and obvious
in view of GB’247 and EWEC 96.
9. Delhi High Court
• Appellant : Dr. Aloys Wobben
• Respondent : Yogesh Mehra
• Both the parties consented to an order of the High Court,
dated September 1, 2009 wherein they mutually agreed to
follow a schedule for an expedited trial in the patent
infringement suit and the counter claims filed.
10. Delhi HC (Continue...)
• After this, the IPAB had revoked six patents granted to Dr.
Wobben, he then alleged that all the six patents revoked were
also a part of the counter claim pending before the Delhi High
Court and the act of Enercon India in pursuing the revocation
petitions before the IPAB after consenting to the Delhi High
Court was an abuse of Judicial process.
• Thus the current appeal.
11. Supreme Court
• Appellant : Dr. Aloys Wobben
• Respondent : Yogesh Mehra
• The Supreme Court in its judgment examined the various
provisions of the Indian Patents Act 1970, in drawing a
protocol with regards to multiple proceedings of patent cases.
12. Issues Before SC
• Dr. Wobben contended that according to Sec 64 (1), either a
counter claim or a revocation petition can be filed, not both.
The court accepted this contention- in Sec 64 (1) ‘or’ is used,
which has to be given a disjunctive reading and not a
conjunctive reading. Otherwise, it will result in conflicting
finding in a revocation petition and a counter claim.
13. Issues Before SC (Continue...)
• Another contention- when a defendant files a counter claim
before the High Court, then only the High Court will have
exclusive jurisdiction and that of the IPAB will cease. The
court, in order to answer this, took a layered approach. It
interpreted various provisions of the Indian patents Act, 1970
and also other legislations like the CPC.
14. Findings of SC
• Under sec 25 (2) and 64 (1), a revocation petition or a post
grant opposition can be filed by ‘any person interested’ and a
counter claim can be filed by a defendant in a patent
infringement suit.
• Due to the opening words of sec 64, SC noted that the
provisions of this section are subservient whenever there is a
conflict with other provisions of the act.
15. Findings of SC (Continue...)
• Therefore, if a post grant opposition is filed under s. 25 (2),
then it will eclipse the right to file a revocation petition or a
counter claim under s. 64 (1).
• The Court also held that both the counter claim and
revocation petition cannot be availed simultaneously under S.
64 (1).
16. Findings of SC (Continue...)
• The court next examined the question- if a party is eligible to
file either revocation petition as ‘any person interested’ as
well as a counter claim as a defendant in a suit, which remedy
can he pursue?
• It held that a counter claim is a separate suit in itself, filed by a
defendant. It must be treated as a separate plaint. Therefore,
a counter claim attracts the principle of res judicata.
• Thus, if a revocation petition has been filed before the IPAB
first, then the defendant in a patent infringement suit cannot
file a counter claim on the same cause of action. This is also
applied vice-versa.
17. Findings of SC (Continue...)
• The court accepted Dr. Wobben’s contention that in the
consent order of the Delhi High Court, both the parties agreed
that the patent infringement suit and the counter claims
pending between the parties should be consolidated and
heard together by the High Court and which is why, Enercon
India cannot pursue the revocation petitions before the IPAB.
• It held that, having consented to one of the available remedies
postulated under law, it would not be open to either of the
consenting parties, to seek redressal from another forum in
addition to the consented forum. Thus, Enercon India has to
pursue the counter claims before the High Court and not the
revocation petitions before the IPAB, due to the consent order
passed by the Delhi High Court, which was affirmed by the
Supreme Court.
18. Conclusion
• Three key points can be understood from the said judgment:
If “any person interested” has filed a post grant opposition
under Section 25(2) , the same would eclipse all similar
rights available to the same person under Section 64(1) .
This would include the right to file a revocation petition
before the IPAB and a counter claim in a patent infringement
suit.
19. Conclusion (Continue...)
If a revocation petition is filed by “any person interested”
under Section 64(1) , prior to the institution of a patent
infringement suit against him, he would be disentitled in law
from seeking a revocation of the patent by way of a counter
claim in a patent infringement suit.
If in response to a patent infringement suit the defendant
has already sought for revocation of a patent by way of a
counter claim, thereafter, the defendant cannot file for a
revocation petition before the IPAB.