Philip Morris Products, SA v Nicoventures Trading Ltd & Anr [2022] EWCA Civ 1638
This was an appeal against the decision of Marcus Smith J that four patents for “heat not burn” tobacco products were invalid for obviousness. Philip Morris, the patentee, contended that the Judge had erred in his construction of the patents and that such error had led him to consider the wrong question on obviousness. The Court of Appeal upheld the first instance decision.
The case is of interest because of the Court of Appeal’s approach to construction where the language of the claims is reasonably capable of bearing a wide or a narrow meaning. If the narrow meaning would exclude something that the patentee has described as an embodiment of the invention, then in the absence of clear exclusionary language, the wider meaning is to be preferred.
Tom Alkin appeared for Philip Morris and Kathryn Pickard for Nicoventures