The fourth module of my introduction to English patent law. The procedure for applying for a UK patent and European patent (UK) and making PCT applications. Appeals to the Comptroller in the UK and the Boards of Appeal in the EPO. Entitlement and inventorship disputes,
The first module of my 5 part course on English patent law. This module defines a patent as a monopoly of an invention. it explains the difference between a monopoly and a right to prevent a particular act such as copying. It introduces readers to specifications and claims. It lays the foundation for the rest of the course.
The second module in my introduction to English patent law. Readers are introduced to the legislation and case law. A closer look at the Patents Act 1977, the Patents Rules 2007, the European Patent Convention, the Patents Court and the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Guides. Readers are also introduced to the Reports of Patent Cases and the Fleet Street Reports.
This is the final module of my introduction to English patent law. It analyses s.60 (1) of the Patents Act 1977 in the light of s.125 (1). It considers para 4 of the Part 63 Practice Direction. It discusses Lord Diplock's judgment in Catnic It mentions s.125 (3) of the Patents Act, art 69 (1) EPC and the Protocol on Interpretation. It analyses Improver, Kirin Amgen, Eli Lilly v Actavis and Icescape. It discusses possible defences and threats actions.
Patents 101 Part 4 - Applying for a PatentJane Lambert
The handout to the fourth module of my introduction to English patent law. The procedure for applying for a UK patent and European patent (UK) and making PCT applications. Appeals to the Comptroller in the UK and the Boards of Appeal in the EPO. Entitlement and inventorship disputes,
The handout for the first module of my an introduction to English patent law. A patent is defined as "a monopoly of an invention". That proposition is unpacked to consider what is meant by "monopoly" and what is meant by "invention". These notes discuss the inventor's bargain with the public and its reflection in the specification, They explore what is meant by the teaching of the patent in the description and the monopoly in the claims,
The handout for the second module of my introduction to English patent law. This covers the sources of law, both legislation and the case law. The module focuses on the Patents Act 1977 and the European Patent Convention. It also introduces readers to the main sets of law reports for patent law, the Reports of Patent Cases ("RPC") and the Fleet Street Reports ("FSR").
The third of my modules on English patent law. This one deals with patentability or the conditions for the grant of a patent, namely novelty, an inventive step, utility and no exclusion from patentability. On novelty, readers are introduced to the concept of the "state of the art" and the test of novelty in General Tire and Rubber v Firestone. As to inventiveness, they are introduced to the concepts of the skilled addressee and common general knowledge and the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v ICOS. Finally, on excluded matter there is a very close look at the Aerotel and Macrossan tests.
This is the handout for the final module of my introduction to English patent law. It analyses s.60 (1) of the Patents Act 1977 in the light of s.125 (1). It considers para 4 of the Part 63 Practice Direction. It discusses Lord Diplock's judgment in Catnic It mentions s.125 (3) of the Patents Act, art 69 (1) EPC and the Protocol on Interpretation. It analyses Improver, Kirin Amgen, Eli Lilly v Actavis and Icescape. It discusses possible defences and threats actions.
The first module of my 5 part course on English patent law. This module defines a patent as a monopoly of an invention. it explains the difference between a monopoly and a right to prevent a particular act such as copying. It introduces readers to specifications and claims. It lays the foundation for the rest of the course.
The second module in my introduction to English patent law. Readers are introduced to the legislation and case law. A closer look at the Patents Act 1977, the Patents Rules 2007, the European Patent Convention, the Patents Court and the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Guides. Readers are also introduced to the Reports of Patent Cases and the Fleet Street Reports.
This is the final module of my introduction to English patent law. It analyses s.60 (1) of the Patents Act 1977 in the light of s.125 (1). It considers para 4 of the Part 63 Practice Direction. It discusses Lord Diplock's judgment in Catnic It mentions s.125 (3) of the Patents Act, art 69 (1) EPC and the Protocol on Interpretation. It analyses Improver, Kirin Amgen, Eli Lilly v Actavis and Icescape. It discusses possible defences and threats actions.
Patents 101 Part 4 - Applying for a PatentJane Lambert
The handout to the fourth module of my introduction to English patent law. The procedure for applying for a UK patent and European patent (UK) and making PCT applications. Appeals to the Comptroller in the UK and the Boards of Appeal in the EPO. Entitlement and inventorship disputes,
The handout for the first module of my an introduction to English patent law. A patent is defined as "a monopoly of an invention". That proposition is unpacked to consider what is meant by "monopoly" and what is meant by "invention". These notes discuss the inventor's bargain with the public and its reflection in the specification, They explore what is meant by the teaching of the patent in the description and the monopoly in the claims,
The handout for the second module of my introduction to English patent law. This covers the sources of law, both legislation and the case law. The module focuses on the Patents Act 1977 and the European Patent Convention. It also introduces readers to the main sets of law reports for patent law, the Reports of Patent Cases ("RPC") and the Fleet Street Reports ("FSR").
The third of my modules on English patent law. This one deals with patentability or the conditions for the grant of a patent, namely novelty, an inventive step, utility and no exclusion from patentability. On novelty, readers are introduced to the concept of the "state of the art" and the test of novelty in General Tire and Rubber v Firestone. As to inventiveness, they are introduced to the concepts of the skilled addressee and common general knowledge and the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v ICOS. Finally, on excluded matter there is a very close look at the Aerotel and Macrossan tests.
This is the handout for the final module of my introduction to English patent law. It analyses s.60 (1) of the Patents Act 1977 in the light of s.125 (1). It considers para 4 of the Part 63 Practice Direction. It discusses Lord Diplock's judgment in Catnic It mentions s.125 (3) of the Patents Act, art 69 (1) EPC and the Protocol on Interpretation. It analyses Improver, Kirin Amgen, Eli Lilly v Actavis and Icescape. It discusses possible defences and threats actions.
The handout for the third of my modules on English patent law. This one deals with patentability or the conditions for the grant of a patent, namely novelty, an inventive step, utility and no exclusion from patentability. On novelty, readers are introduced to the concept of the "state of the art" and the test of novelty in General Tire and Rubber v Firestone. As to inventiveness, they are introduced to the concepts of the skilled addressee and common general knowledge and the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v ICOS. Finally, on excluded matter there is a very close look at the Aerotel and Macrpssan tests.
US Patent Litigation CSIRO v. Cisco - Judge Davis's Damages Calculation of Re...Rahul Dev
How to calculate damages during patent infringement?
In case of patent infringement, there are two types of damages: (a) Loss Profits, and (b) Reasonable Royalty. Loss profits imply additional profits that the patent owner would have made if there had been no patent infringement. Reasonably royalty on the other hand implies minimum damages that a patent owner can receive pertaining to a reasonable amount that someone would have agreed to pay to the patent owner for using the patented technology and patent owner would have accepted.
How to calculate damages during patent infringement?
In case of patent infringement, there are two types of damages: (a) Loss Profits, and (b) Reasonable Royalty. Loss profits imply additional profits that the patent owner would have made if there had been no patent infringement. Reasonably royalty on the other hand implies minimum damages that a patent owner can receive pertaining to a reasonable amount that someone would have agreed to pay to the patent owner for using the patented technology and patent owner would have accepted.
Provisions related to Patent Damages as per US Patent Law
In accordance with the provisions of US patent laws (35 U.S. Code § 284 – Damages), section 284 states that a patentee is entitled to damages adequate to compensate for any infringement and that compensation cannot be less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer.
How to determine “reasonable royalty” damages?
In past, various federal courts in US have clarified that in case patentee is unable to prove actual damages (i.e. loss profits), there exists no single methodology to determine reasonable royalty damages.
Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)
Technical standard across various industries are defined by standards organizations (SDOs) that can be patented by private companies to protect their research and development activities. Such patents relating to standardized technology may be used by patent owners to pressurize the market and create monopoly to prevent competition. Accordingly, the SDOs require their participants do disclose patents covering standards prior to adoption. SDOs further require the patent owners to license such patents on “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) terms.
However, FRAND terms have been core of various patent infringement lawsuits, specifically in the smartphone industry, wherein the industry standard covers core features of any smartphone, such as, for example, wireless connectivity (WiFi), Bluetooth, GPS (location capabilities), and the like.
WiFi Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)
What Does it mean?
To understand go through the whole document...
Nothing but this is basically intended to give message about the term "Patent Applications"? What they are? Benefits? Drawback? etc
Bofors scam for the subject of Business Ethics and CSRKartik Mehta
The Bofors scandal was a major political scandal that occurred between Sweden and India during 1980s and 1990s, initiated by Congress politicians and implicating the Indian prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi and several other members of the Swedish and Indian governments who were accused of receiving kickbacks from Bofors AB for winning a bid to supply India's 155 mm field howitzer.
Disclosure can often be the key phase in legal proceedings. Up to this point one or more of the parties may be in the dark, unclear of the true merits of their claim or defence, but disclosure can serve to clarify who has the better of the arguments and where the balance of power lies for settlement purposes.
Presentation given to the International Marine Contractors Association Conference in Amsterdam 28 & 29 November 2012 .
Iin the current economic climate Clyde & Co suggest that claims handling issues of the kind Graeme will discuss are likely to be increasingly relevant and topical as far as the IMCA’s members are concerned.
Contractors are being pressured by operators to accept more risk on projects and insurers are increasing their deductibles which means contractors are bearing increasingly large exposures to uninsured losses.
Claims which would once have fallen to the operator or to project insurers are increasingly becoming the responsibility of contractors. Further, it is clear from the number of recent high-profile incidents that offshore operations are themselves becoming inherently riskier as projects move to more extreme environments and more unstable jurisdictions.
Unlike operators, many contrators may not have an in-house legal function or may not have one with claims handling experience. Graeme discusses basic legal concepts which contractors may face.
Graeme’s presentation mainly discusses claims handling issues but is equally relevant to those who are involved in contract drafting, on the basis that prevention is better than cure.
The ongoing implementation of elements of the America Invents Act represents the biggest changes to US patent code in generations. The impact of such sweeping changes to the US patent systems will be exceptionally significant for life sciences companies whose life blood is dependent on the value of their intellectual property and patents. This is the only event where you will have the opportunity to join your colleagues in an advanced think-tank discussion regarding the practical impact of patent reform on the life sciences industry.
The unitary patent and unified patent courtJane Lambert
The slides to an introduction to the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court which I presented in chambers to a selected audience of solicitors and patent attorneys on 2 Feb 2016.
The handout for the third of my modules on English patent law. This one deals with patentability or the conditions for the grant of a patent, namely novelty, an inventive step, utility and no exclusion from patentability. On novelty, readers are introduced to the concept of the "state of the art" and the test of novelty in General Tire and Rubber v Firestone. As to inventiveness, they are introduced to the concepts of the skilled addressee and common general knowledge and the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v ICOS. Finally, on excluded matter there is a very close look at the Aerotel and Macrpssan tests.
US Patent Litigation CSIRO v. Cisco - Judge Davis's Damages Calculation of Re...Rahul Dev
How to calculate damages during patent infringement?
In case of patent infringement, there are two types of damages: (a) Loss Profits, and (b) Reasonable Royalty. Loss profits imply additional profits that the patent owner would have made if there had been no patent infringement. Reasonably royalty on the other hand implies minimum damages that a patent owner can receive pertaining to a reasonable amount that someone would have agreed to pay to the patent owner for using the patented technology and patent owner would have accepted.
How to calculate damages during patent infringement?
In case of patent infringement, there are two types of damages: (a) Loss Profits, and (b) Reasonable Royalty. Loss profits imply additional profits that the patent owner would have made if there had been no patent infringement. Reasonably royalty on the other hand implies minimum damages that a patent owner can receive pertaining to a reasonable amount that someone would have agreed to pay to the patent owner for using the patented technology and patent owner would have accepted.
Provisions related to Patent Damages as per US Patent Law
In accordance with the provisions of US patent laws (35 U.S. Code § 284 – Damages), section 284 states that a patentee is entitled to damages adequate to compensate for any infringement and that compensation cannot be less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer.
How to determine “reasonable royalty” damages?
In past, various federal courts in US have clarified that in case patentee is unable to prove actual damages (i.e. loss profits), there exists no single methodology to determine reasonable royalty damages.
Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)
Technical standard across various industries are defined by standards organizations (SDOs) that can be patented by private companies to protect their research and development activities. Such patents relating to standardized technology may be used by patent owners to pressurize the market and create monopoly to prevent competition. Accordingly, the SDOs require their participants do disclose patents covering standards prior to adoption. SDOs further require the patent owners to license such patents on “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) terms.
However, FRAND terms have been core of various patent infringement lawsuits, specifically in the smartphone industry, wherein the industry standard covers core features of any smartphone, such as, for example, wireless connectivity (WiFi), Bluetooth, GPS (location capabilities), and the like.
WiFi Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)
What Does it mean?
To understand go through the whole document...
Nothing but this is basically intended to give message about the term "Patent Applications"? What they are? Benefits? Drawback? etc
Bofors scam for the subject of Business Ethics and CSRKartik Mehta
The Bofors scandal was a major political scandal that occurred between Sweden and India during 1980s and 1990s, initiated by Congress politicians and implicating the Indian prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi and several other members of the Swedish and Indian governments who were accused of receiving kickbacks from Bofors AB for winning a bid to supply India's 155 mm field howitzer.
Disclosure can often be the key phase in legal proceedings. Up to this point one or more of the parties may be in the dark, unclear of the true merits of their claim or defence, but disclosure can serve to clarify who has the better of the arguments and where the balance of power lies for settlement purposes.
Presentation given to the International Marine Contractors Association Conference in Amsterdam 28 & 29 November 2012 .
Iin the current economic climate Clyde & Co suggest that claims handling issues of the kind Graeme will discuss are likely to be increasingly relevant and topical as far as the IMCA’s members are concerned.
Contractors are being pressured by operators to accept more risk on projects and insurers are increasing their deductibles which means contractors are bearing increasingly large exposures to uninsured losses.
Claims which would once have fallen to the operator or to project insurers are increasingly becoming the responsibility of contractors. Further, it is clear from the number of recent high-profile incidents that offshore operations are themselves becoming inherently riskier as projects move to more extreme environments and more unstable jurisdictions.
Unlike operators, many contrators may not have an in-house legal function or may not have one with claims handling experience. Graeme discusses basic legal concepts which contractors may face.
Graeme’s presentation mainly discusses claims handling issues but is equally relevant to those who are involved in contract drafting, on the basis that prevention is better than cure.
The ongoing implementation of elements of the America Invents Act represents the biggest changes to US patent code in generations. The impact of such sweeping changes to the US patent systems will be exceptionally significant for life sciences companies whose life blood is dependent on the value of their intellectual property and patents. This is the only event where you will have the opportunity to join your colleagues in an advanced think-tank discussion regarding the practical impact of patent reform on the life sciences industry.
The unitary patent and unified patent courtJane Lambert
The slides to an introduction to the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court which I presented in chambers to a selected audience of solicitors and patent attorneys on 2 Feb 2016.
How to Enforce your Intellectual Property Rights without Going BustJane Lambert
These are the slides of a presentation that I gave to Leeds Inventors Group in Leeds on the 15 Jan 2014 and IP North West in Accrington on 16 Jan 2014. As ever it is necessary to distinguish between "intellectual property" (the laws that protect investment in branding, design, technology and works of art and literature such trade marks, registered designs, unregistered design rights, patents and copyrights) from "intellectual assets" (the objects of such protection such as trade names, logos, designs, inventions, novels, films, computer programs and websites). Except for bootlegging, counterfeiting and piracy (certain infringements of rights in performances, trade marks and copyrights on an industrial scale) infringement of intellectual property rights is not an offence in this country. Thus it is up to each intellectual property owner to enforce his or her rights in the civil courts. Unfortunately civil litigation in England and Wales can be very expensive and the party that loses the litigation usually has to pay the party that succeeds, A survey by IPAC Ithe Intellectual Property Advisory Committee) in 2003 compared the cost of litigation in England and Wales with the cost in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the USA and found that the UK and the USA were the most expensive countries. Costs in France, Germany and the Netherlands ranged from 10,000 to 50,000 euros whereas in England it cost over £1 million to bring an action in the High Court and between £150,000 and £250,000 in the County Court. Costs in the USA were comparable but there the losing party did not usually have to pay the lawyers' fees of the successful party. Thus, the UK was the most expensive and risky country of the developed world to bring an enforcement action. This appears to have had a dampening effect on innovation in that the number of European patent applications from the UK has trailed not just the USA and Japan but also France, Germany and even the Netherlands and Switzerland which have much smaller populations. Over the last 10 years HM government has tried to reduce the cost of dispute resolution. The Patents Act 2004 enabled IPO examiners to give advisory opinions on whether a patent was valid and whether it has been infringed. In 2010 new rules were introduced to limit the recoverable costs of litigation in the Patents County Court to £50,000. In Oct 2012 a new small claims track was introduced in the Patents County Court. The costs of litigation in the UK for small and medium enterprises is now comparable to those in continental Europe. The final change came in Oct 2013 when the Patents County Court was replaced by IPEC (the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court). HM government has also negotiated an agreement with all the EU member states except Italy and Spain by which the EPO will issue a European patent for all their territories as though they were one country (unified patent) and for disputes to be decided by a single Unified Patent Court in Paris,
IP Revolution? Scenarios for the future. How to find your way in IP alternative Dispute Resolution? Part 2: Life Sciences. ADR for patent disputes in the Life Science sector
The Patent Box: Introduction to PatentsJane Lambert
This was the opening presentation on a workshop on the patents box organized by Liverpool Inventors Club. The "patents box" is a tax concession to encourage R & D in the UK. This presentation discusses what is meant by a patent, why businesses apply for them, how to apply for them and how much they cost.
Basic introduction to UK patent law originally given to Leeds Inventors\' Club on 16 April 2008. Explires the nature, scope and requirements for a patent, the procedure, infringement and discusses whether patenting is worth the trouble and expense. Considers alternatives to patent proteciton.
UPC Land in Sight - Three (3) Important Facts, Five (5) Myths, and Ten (10) P...Martin Schweiger
A talk before the International Intellectual Property Society (New York)
by Martin Schweiger
on February 03, 2023
Since the 70ies of the last century, there have been efforts to create a uniform European patent that could replace all national patents.
Now, only 50 years later, there is a “Unitary Patent Package” at reach, a combination of the Unitary Patent regulations and an Agreement on the Unified Patent Court (UPC).
That package created the “UPC Land”.
The UPC/UP system is said to start on June 1, 2023
A checklist for litigants bringing or defending IP actions in the Small Claims Track of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court.
This article covers the court's jurisdiction, its rules and practice, pleadings, disclosure and remedies
This article supplements IPEC Small claims Track Guide, CPR Parts 27 and 63 and the Part 27A and Part 63 Practice Directions.
In Nov 2015 a British private limited company registered the words YORUBA and Yoruba as UK trade marks for a wide range of goods and services. Nobody seems to have objected to the registration at the time. On 23 May 2021, another UK incorporated company called The Culture Tree protested vociferously. Many others around the world joined in. It appears that the registered proprietor has agreed to assign the registrations to The Culture Tree which has removed one objection. But should it have been possible to register the name of a nation of 70 million at all? What should be done to prevent issues of this kind in future?
Some background information for a dialogue with Carwyn Edwards on copyright and ICT organized by North Wales Tech and North Wales Creative on 21 April 2021,
Here are the slides of a presentation that I gave to the Barnsley Business Village on 19 Feb 2021. Unlike my earlier presentations, this was designed for business owners. I discussed what was meant by IP, why monopolies such as patents and exclusive rights such as copyrights were difficult to reconcile with the concept of a single market, the need for the approximation of laws and unitary IP rights and the arrangements made in the withdrawal agreement to continue to protect in the UK intellectual assets that were protected by EU intellectual property rights.
What every Business in Wales needs to know about Intellectual PropertyJane Lambert
On 9 Feb 2021, I gave a talk to the Menai Science Park Enterprise Hub entitled "What Every Business in Wales needs to know about Intellectual Property." I prepared these slides for the talk although I did not all of them. Instead, I asked them for their interests which seemed to be registering trade marks and registering designs.
What every business in Bradford needs to know about Intellectual PropertyJane Lambert
Yesterday, I was asked by Steve Ding of Webanbywhere to give the first presentation of the BradfordNetwork. I was delighted to accept that invitation because Steve ran a network for the creative sector in Bradford and Barnsley called Bmedi@ about 10 years ago. The network held talks with leading artists, designers, entrepreneurs, inventors and innovators from West Yorkshire and beyond and regular breakfast meetings at the Business and Innovation Centres in Barnsley. Those events were very well attended. Sadly Bmedi@ disbanded several years ago, It has been sorely missed ever since. At present the only events that can take place are online but the BradfordNetwork hopes to hold some live meetings in the Bmedi@ format with the same sort of speakers once the public health emergency is over.
On 26 Jan 2020, I have a talk over Zoom on "IP after Brexit". My slides are already on Slideshare. These are supplemented by this handout which covers:
- Art 50 of the Treaty of European Union
- The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019
- The statutory instruments made in anticipation of our exiting with a withdrawal agreement
- The withdrawal agreement
- The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020
- The Trade and Cooperation Agreement
- The European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020.
These notes track every legislative change to the requirement in the withdrawal agreement. I also discuss changes to the law not effected by the withdrawal agreement and consider future development of our IP law.
At 23:00 on 31 Dec 2020 EU law ceased to apply to the UK including the Regulations establishing the EU Trade Mark, the Community Design and many other rights. A priority in the negotiations for the UK's withdrawal from the EU was the continued protection of the brands, designs and other intellectual assets that been protected by such rights. The withdrawal agreement entered in Jan 2020 provided for EU trade marks, Community designs, Community plant vaieties, database rights and supplementary protection certificates. This presentation considers the relevant provisions of the withdrawal agreementn and the statutes and secondary legislation which implemnted it. Such legislation is now bearing a great part of the UK's IP infrastructure.
These are the slides for a presentation that I shall deliver over Zoom on 2 Sept 2020 at 14:00. It discusses the judgment of the UK Supreme Court in Unwired Planet International Ltd r v Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd [2020] UKSC 37 which was delivered on 26 Aug 2020.
These are the slides for my presentation to the Menai Science Park Enterprise Hub on 30 June 2020.
This presentation explains what is meant by intellectual property and why it is important to business.
It considers different types of IP:
- patents
- trade marks
- registered designs
- copyrights and related rights,
I talked about related rights and how they can be obtained and rights that arise automatically,
I discussed enforcement and sources of further information including the Business and IP Centres at the British Library and Liverpool.
Finally, I mentioned the network of IP experts to assist M-SParc tenants and others in North Wales.
These are the slides for the presentation that I was due to give to the makers at FFPWS on 1 April. FFIWS is a maker space in Porthmadog with laser cutters, 3D printers and all sorts of other impressive kits. As my visit has had to be cancelled I have decided to deliver my presentation online. If there is still enough interest in Porthmadog (or anywhere else in the world for that matter) I will give a fee webinar on 15 April 2020 on IP Law for Makers, The IP law in question will be the law of Wales and England which will not be exactly the same elsewhere but most of the presentation should be relevant more or less anywhere.
Searching IP Databases and using what you findJane Lambert
How to search a patent, trade mark or registered designs database, reasons for carrying out such searches, what you may find there and how to use the information.
IP for Start-ups and other Small and Medium EnterprisesJane Lambert
These are the slides of a presentation that I gave to business owners at the Library@The Lightbox in Barnsley on Monday 23 Sept 2019. I explained that IP is the bundle of laws that protect investment in intellectual assets, that is to say, branding, design, technology and creativity. I discussed the intellectual property rights that have to be registered (patents, trade marks, registered designs and plant varieties) and those such as copyright, unregistered design rights and rights in performances, I spoke abiout licensing, assignment and franchising and enfiorcement of intellectual property rights,
World IP Day at M-SParc: "What is IP?" Jane Lambert
These are the slides of a presentation that I gave at the Menai Science Park on Anglesey as part of Wales's celebrations of World IP Day 2019. They cover "What is IP?" "Why it is important", "How to acquire IP" and "How to enforce it."
WINDING UP of COMPANY, Modes of DissolutionKHURRAMWALI
Winding up, also known as liquidation, refers to the legal and financial process of dissolving a company. It involves ceasing operations, selling assets, settling debts, and ultimately removing the company from the official business registry.
Here's a breakdown of the key aspects of winding up:
Reasons for Winding Up:
Insolvency: This is the most common reason, where the company cannot pay its debts. Creditors may initiate a compulsory winding up to recover their dues.
Voluntary Closure: The owners may decide to close the company due to reasons like reaching business goals, facing losses, or merging with another company.
Deadlock: If shareholders or directors cannot agree on how to run the company, a court may order a winding up.
Types of Winding Up:
Voluntary Winding Up: This is initiated by the company's shareholders through a resolution passed by a majority vote. There are two main types:
Members' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is solvent (has enough assets to pay off its debts) and shareholders will receive any remaining assets after debts are settled.
Creditors' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is insolvent and creditors will be prioritized in receiving payment from the sale of assets.
Compulsory Winding Up: This is initiated by a court order, typically at the request of creditors, government agencies, or even by the company itself if it's insolvent.
Process of Winding Up:
Appointment of Liquidator: A qualified professional is appointed to oversee the winding-up process. They are responsible for selling assets, paying off debts, and distributing any remaining funds.
Cease Trading: The company stops its regular business operations.
Notification of Creditors: Creditors are informed about the winding up and invited to submit their claims.
Sale of Assets: The company's assets are sold to generate cash to pay off creditors.
Payment of Debts: Creditors are paid according to a set order of priority, with secured creditors receiving payment before unsecured creditors.
Distribution to Shareholders: If there are any remaining funds after all debts are settled, they are distributed to shareholders according to their ownership stake.
Dissolution: Once all claims are settled and distributions made, the company is officially dissolved and removed from the business register.
Impact of Winding Up:
Employees: Employees will likely lose their jobs during the winding-up process.
Creditors: Creditors may not recover their debts in full, especially if the company is insolvent.
Shareholders: Shareholders may not receive any payout if the company's debts exceed its assets.
Winding up is a complex legal and financial process that can have significant consequences for all parties involved. It's important to seek professional legal and financial advice when considering winding up a company.
Introducing New Government Regulation on Toll Road.pdfAHRP Law Firm
For nearly two decades, Government Regulation Number 15 of 2005 on Toll Roads ("GR No. 15/2005") has served as the cornerstone of toll road legislation. However, with the emergence of various new developments and legal requirements, the Government has enacted Government Regulation Number 23 of 2024 on Toll Roads to replace GR No. 15/2005. This new regulation introduces several provisions impacting toll business entities and toll road users. Find out more out insights about this topic in our Legal Brief publication.
DNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptxpatrons legal
Get insights into DNA testing and its application in civil and criminal matters. Find out how it contributes to fair and accurate legal proceedings. For more information: https://www.patronslegal.com/criminal-litigation.html
Military Commissions details LtCol Thomas Jasper as Detailed Defense CounselThomas (Tom) Jasper
Military Commissions Trial Judiciary, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Notice of the Chief Defense Counsel's detailing of LtCol Thomas F. Jasper, Jr. USMC, as Detailed Defense Counsel for Abd Al Hadi Al-Iraqi on 6 August 2014 in the case of United States v. Hadi al Iraqi (10026)
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.
ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v/s Union of India.pptxshweeta209
transfer of the P.I.L filed by lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in Delhi High Court to Supreme Court.
on the issue of UNIFORM MARRIAGE AGE of men and women.
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
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.
RIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptxOmGod1
Victims of crime have a range of rights designed to ensure their protection, support, and participation in the justice system. These rights include the right to be treated with dignity and respect, the right to be informed about the progress of their case, and the right to be heard during legal proceedings. Victims are entitled to protection from intimidation and harm, access to support services such as counseling and medical care, and the right to restitution from the offender. Additionally, many jurisdictions provide victims with the right to participate in parole hearings and the right to privacy to protect their personal information from public disclosure. These rights aim to acknowledge the impact of crime on victims and to provide them with the necessary resources and involvement in the judicial process.
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/.
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf46adnanshahzad
All eyes on Rafah: But why?. The Rafah border crossing, a crucial point between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, often finds itself at the center of global attention. As we explore the significance of Rafah, we’ll uncover why all eyes are on Rafah and the complexities surrounding this pivotal region.
INTRODUCTION
What makes Rafah so significant that it captures global attention? The phrase ‘All eyes are on Rafah’ resonates not just with those in the region but with people worldwide who recognize its strategic, humanitarian, and political importance. In this guide, we will delve into the factors that make Rafah a focal point for international interest, examining its historical context, humanitarian challenges, and political dimensions.
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.
2. Content
• Territoriality
• Patenting options
• Patents for the UK alone
• Entitlement Disputes
• Examination
• EPO and PCT
• Alternatives to patenting
3. Territoriality
Patents are granted for:
• Countries: UK, USA, France, Japan
• Groups of countries: Gulf Cooperation
Council and Eurasia
• Parts of countries: Hong Kong, Macau
Not yet possible to apply for a “world
patent” or an “EU patent.”
4. Patenting Options
Inventors seeking patent protection in
the UK can:
• Apply for a patent for the UK alone
• Designate the UK in a European patent
• Include the UK in an application
through the Patent Cooperation Treaty
5. Patents for the UK Alone
• Applications to the UK IPO in Newport
are governed by s.14 of the Patents Act
1977 and rule 12 of the Patent Rules
2007
• S.14 (2) requires a request for a patent,
specification and an abstract
6. Patents for the UK Alone
S.14 (3) provides:
“The specification of an application shall
disclose the invention in a manner which
is clear enough and complete enough for
the invention to be performed by a
person skilled in the art.”
7. Patents for the UK Alone
S.14 (5) requires the claims to:
“(a) define the matter for which the
applicant seeks protection;
(b) be clear and concise;
(c) be supported by the description; and
(d) relate to one invention or to a group of
inventions which are so linked as to form a
single inventive concept.”
8. Entitlement Disputes
Persons who believe that they are
entitled to an invention may refer the
question to the Comptroller under s.8. If
the claim is resisted an official known as
a “hearing officer” will hold a hearing to
determine the matter.
9. Examination
Officials known as “examiners” will
consider the application and decide
whether it meets the requirements for a
patent.
If it does, the examiner will allow the
application to proceed to grant.
10. Examination
If not, the examiner will notify the
applicant of the objection and allow him
an opportunity to satisfy it.
If the applicant disagrees with the
examiner he can appeal to a hearing
officer.
11. Examination
Third parties cannot oppose an
application for a patent as they can a
trade mark, but they can make
observations under s.21.
12. EPO
A European patent designating the UK is
known as a European patent (UK)
For all practical purposes a European
patent (UK) is treated as though it had
been granted by the IPO
The substantive provisions of the EPC
are similar to the Patents Act.
One difference is “oppositions”
13. PCT Applications
Applications are made to a national
patent office.
WIPO will consider whether it meets
specified conditions.
If it does, WIPO will send the application
to local patent offices to determine
whether local law is met.
14. Alternatives to Patents
Trade secrecy:
• Law of confidence
• Directive 2016/943
Unregistered design right
• Semiconductor topographies
Copyright for computer programs
15. Questions and answers
Jane Lambert
4-5 Gray’s Inn Square
London
WC1R 3AH
jane.lambert@nipclaw.com
www.nipclaw.com
+44 (0)20 7404 5252