International Agreements
European Patent Convention
Consolidated amendments
UK Legislation
Patents Act 1977 (Unofficial
consolidation)
Patents Act 2004
Statute of Monopolies 1623.
Cases
Biogen Inc. v Medeva Plc
1997] RPC 1
Advanced Building Systems Pty Ltd. v Ramset Fasteners (Aust) Pty Ltd
[1998] HCA 19
Re CHPH's Applications
[2005] EWHC 1589 (Patents Court Peter Prescott QC 21 July 2005)
25 Jan 2005
Neither the Patents Act 1977 nor the European Patent Convention defines an "invention" as such, though both set out in detail the conditions of patentability. However, it is clear from s.60 (1) that an invention can be either a "product" or "process" and, equally, from s.1 (2) that it cannot be
"anything which
consists of -
(a) a discovery, scientific theory or mathematical method;
(b) a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work or any other aesthetic
creation whatsoever;
(c) a scheme, rule or method for performing a mental act, playing a game or
doing business, or a program for a computer;
(d) the presentation of information;
.... as such."
Lord Hoffmann declined the opportunity to define an invention in Biogen Inc. v Medeva Plc [1997] RPC 1.
The High Court of Australia had to confront the issue in Advanced Building Systems Pty Ltd. v Ramset Fasteners (Aust) Pty Ltd [1998] HCA 19 because there was a counterclaim for revocation of the claimant's patent on the grounds that it was not an invention. Their honours sidestepped the issue by holding that an invention was something that would have been protected by the Statute of Monopolies 1623.
Case Notes
Inventions

Important