In the case of Shanks-v-Unilever Plc the Supreme Court had to consider what amounts to an “outstanding benefit” for the purposes of determining whether an employee who has made an invention belonging to an employer for which a patent has been granted is entitled to compensation pursuant to s.40(1) of the Patents Act 1977?
During the course of his employment with Unilever, Professor Shanks invented a device designed to measure glucose concentrations in blood, serum or urine.
The rights to the invention belonged to Unilever, which subsequently obtained patents in respect of the invention. Years later, these patents were licensed to companies operating in the blood glucose testing field. Professor Shanks brought a claim for employee compensation against Unilever pursuant to s.40 (1) of the Patents Act 1977. The Intellectual Property Office concluded that the financial benefit to Unilever from licensing the patent rights was £24.5m, but that this was not an “outstanding” benefit as required by the terms of s.40(1). This conclusion was upheld by the High Court and Court of Appeal.
Suffering an intellectual property and technology disputes can have serious implications on your business. Our business solicitors will quickly and efficiently put your case together and act on your behalf.
Call Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department on 0161 624 6811(Option 6) or email email@example.com. We can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.
Latest posts by Shalish Mehta (see all)
- Dua Lipa facing fresh copyright lawsuit over hit song Levitating - 5th August 2023
- Budget retailer Wilko on brink of collapse with 12,000 jobs at risk - 3rd August 2023
- Three brothers win court battle with tennis coach sister over mother’s £1m will - 29th July 2023
- Virgin Media O2 announces plans to slash up to 2,000 jobs - 26th July 2023
- Burger van chef wins fight to keep £5m inheritance from customer - 21st July 2023