Sycurio Limited v PCI-PAL Plc and another [2024] EWCA Civ 606
The Claimant appealed the decision of Bacon J against the finding that its patent was invalid for obviousness over the prior art and, in any event, would not have been infringed on a normal construction or under the doctrine of equivalents. The question of construction arose in part from the issue of conformance of the description with the claims, and in particular whether the skilled reader would understand certain embodiments in the specification to be outside the scope of the claims as granted.
In upholding the Judge’s decision on construction the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Arnold giving the leading judgment, dismissed the appeal on ground 1 (the invalidity appeal) and held that it was therefore not necessary to determine the remainder of the appeal. The Court of Appeal’s judgment gives detailed consideration to the structure of the specification and the language used to describe the options and embodiments disclosed therein.
Michael Silverleaf KC and Kyra Nezami acted for the Appellants, instructed by Michelmores LLP. Edward Cronan acted for the Respondents, instructed by Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP.