of the petitioner's agent, an order was made admitting the petition. (14 Moo. P. C. C. 364.) (n) In re BALL'S PATENT. [1879] In the Privy Council the notice of objections is filed under the 6th rule of the Orders of the Privy Council, dated the 18th of November, 1835, which requires parties served with the petition to lodge at the Council Office, within a fortnight after such service, notice of the grounds of their objections to the granting of the prayer of the petition. This order is unaffected by the provision contained in the 41st section of the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, and it is sufficient under the rule to state the grounds of the objections without stating the particulars of those objections. Consequently, where the opponents state as one of their grounds of objection that the patent has been anticipated, and give some instances of such anticipation, evidence of other instances of anticipation not mentioned in the objection may still be given in evidence. (L. R., 4 App. Cas. 171.) (0) In re NEWTON'S PATENT. [1884] Sub-s. (4) of sect. 25, does not alter the rules adopted by the Judicial Committee, and it is still the duty of a patentee to produce accounts of profits received under foreign patents. (9 App. Cas. 592.) (P) YATES & KELLETT'S PATENT. [1887] No accounts having been filed within the proper time, accounts were subsequently filed which were insufficient in the details given. The petitioners applied for an adjournment to amend, but the Crown opposing, the adjournment was refused and the petition dismissed. (3 T. L. R., 353; 4 O. R. 150.) Costs. PATENTS ACT, 1883, Sect. 25. (7) The costs of all parties of and incident to such proceedings shall be in the discretion of the Judicial Committee; and the orders of the Committee respecting costs shall be enforceable as if they were orders of a Division of the High Court of Justice. (4) In re WESTRUPP & GIBBIN'S PATENT. [1836] Lord Lyndhurst: "My opinion on the subject of costs is this: if a party entitled to oppose does come and oppose, and opposes successfully, if we do not give costs we shall discourage persons coming to protect the interests of the public. We have the power to give costs in any matter referred to us, and, sitting here as a Judicial Committee, we can give costs under the general Act, not under the Patent Act." (1 Web. P. C. 556.) (r) In re MACINTOSH'S PATENT. [1837] The Judicial Committee give costs of opposition when the petitioner abandons his application for extension. (1 Web. P. C. (8) In re DOWNTON'S PATENT. [1839] Costs will be given to the petitioner where there is no ground for the opposition. (1 Web. P. C. 567.) (t) In re MUNTZ'S PATENT. [1846] Where the petitioner had fairly and honestly stated his case, both the things against and the things for him, in his petition, and the inquiry had been prolonged by the opposition, the costs of the opposition refused, although the petition had been dismissed on the ground of sufficient remuneration. (2 Web. P. C. 122.) (u) In re BRIDSON'S PATENT. [1852] Costs given to all the opposers upon petitioners abandoning petition before hearing. When the petition is abandoned, it is not necessary that the opposers should serve the petitioners with notice of their intended application to the court for costs of opposition. (7 Moo. P. C. C. 499.) (v) In re HORNBY'S PATENT. [1853.] On a petition for prolongation of letters patent, a day was fixed for hearing. Objections were lodged against an extension. Before the hearing the petitioners abandoned the prosecution of the petition. In such circumstances costs of opposition allowed to opposer. (7 Moo. P. C. C. 503.) (w) In re MILNER'S PATENT. [1854.] The Judicial Committee will exercise a discretion as to the allowance of an opposer's costs upon an abandoned petition for extention of letters patent. A gross sum allowed for costs of opposers, instead of referring their costs to taxation. An affidavit of merits by the petitioner upon the question of costs, rejected, as no copy had been served upon the opposers. (9 Moo. P. C. C. 39.) (x) In re JONES' PATENT. [1854] Where there were two opponents to an application for a prolongation of a patent upon substantially the same grounds of objection, the Judicial Committee, upon a successful opposition, allowed a gross sum for the costs of both parties. Opponents' costs directed to be taxed at 100l., and divided between the opponents. (9 Moo. P. C. C. 41.) (y) In re HONIBALL'S PATENT. [1855] The Right Hon. Pemberton Leigh: "It is of great importance that parties should not be discouraged from bringing important facts to the knowledge of the Court by fear of the costs which they may have to pay, even if their opposition be successful; and upon this ground, in Westrupp & Gibbins' Patent, the parties opposing were allowed their costs. But we are not satisfied with the manner in which this opposition has been conducted. Much expense has been occasioned by relying upon patents for inventions which have really no resemblance to this, and witnesses have been produced to whose testimony, as we have already intimated, we cannot give the smallest credit.' No costs allowed to the opponents. (9 Moo. P. C. C. 394.) (z) In re HILLS' PATENT. [1863] Upon the dismissal of a petition for prolongation, the Judicial Committee, to avoid the expense of a formal taxation, allowed the petitioner the option of paying a gross sum of 1,000l. to the opponents for the costs of their successful opposition: such sum to be apportioned by the Registrar of the Privy Council among the several opponents, or in the alternative, dismissed the petition with costs generally. (1 Moo. P. C. C., N. S. 258.) (a) In re WIELD'S PATENT. [1871] When two sets of opponents really represent the same kind of opposition, one set of costs, to be apportioned between them, will be allowed, unless the petitioner should prefer to tax the costs of all parties. (8 Moo. P. C. C., N. S. 300.) Sir J. W. Colvile: "Their lordships have considered the question of costs, and they are inclined to adhere to the rule that has been laid down, almost from the first application under the Act giving them jurisdiction in patent cases, that in the exercise of their power to grant costs it is certainly not desirable to refuse the costs of a fair opposition, since it is rather in the interest of this tribunal to encourage bona fide oppositions, in order that the Court may be put into possession of all that can be alleged against the continuance of the patent." (Ib. 304.) (b) In re JOHNSON'S PATENT. [1871] Where there were several opponents; on dismissing the petition a lump sum was awarded the opponents, to be divided pro ratá for costs. (8 Moo. P. C. C., N. S. 282.) MORGAN BROWN'S PATENT. [1886] The petition being withdrawn, costs were given to the opponents. (3 0. R. 212.) Failure of Consideration. See Grant, p. 149 (u). Fees. PATENTS ACT, 1883, sect. 24. (1.) There shall be paid in respect of the several instruments described in the Second Schedule to this Act, the fees in that schedule mentioned, and there shall likewise be paid, in respect of other matters under this part of the Act, such fees as may be from time to time, with the sanction of the Treasury, prescribed by the Board of Trade; and such fees shall be levied and paid to the account of Her Majesty's Exchequer in such manner as the Treasury may from time to time direct. (2.) The Board of Trade may from time to time, if they think fit, with the consent of the Treasury, reduce any of those fees. LIST OF FEES PAYABLE ON AND IN CONNECTION WITH LETTERS PATENT. 3. or On filing complete specification with first application. 4. On appeal from Comptroller to Law Officer. By appellant. 7. On application to amend specification: 8. Up to sealing. By applicant After sealing. By patentee 9. On notice of opposition to amendment. By opponent 10. On hearing by Comptroller. By applicant and by opponent respectively 11. On application to amend specification during action or proceeding. By patentee 12. On application to the Board of Trade for a compulsory licence. By person applying 13. On opposition to grant of compulsory licence. By patentee. On certificate of renewal :— 14. 15. Before end of 4 years from date of patent Before end of 7 years, or in the case of patents granted or in lieu of the fees of £50 and £100, the following annual 16. Before the expiration of the 4th year from the date of the patent 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 On enlargement of time for payment of renewal fees:- 29. For every entry of an assignment, transmission, agreement, 30. For duplicate of letters patent (but never less than one shilling) 34. of drawings, cost according to agreement. 35. For certifying office copies MSS. or printed 36. On request to Comptroller to correct a clerical error up to sealing 0 10 0 0 0 37. For certificate of Comptroller under section 96. 38. For altering address in register 39. For enlargement of time for filing complete specification not exceeding one month 40. For enlargement of time for acceptance of complete specifi cation First Inventor. See under Patentee, pp. 272 to 278. Foreign Invention, importer of, may obtain patent, pp. 144, 278 communicated, to be distinguished from what is new, p. 145 (1). Importer of Foreign Invention. (d) HASTINGS' PATENT. [1567] A patent was granted to Mr. Hastings in consideration that he brought in the skill of making frisadoes as they were made in Harlem and Amsterdam, beyond the seas, being not used in England. (Noy. R. 182; 1 Web. P. C. 6.) (e) MATTHEY'S PATENT. [Eliz.] By patent was granted unto him the sole making of knives with bone hafts and plates of lattin, because, as the patent suggested, he brought the first use thereof from beyond seas. (Noy. R. 178; 1 Web. P. C. 6.) (f) DARCY . ALLIN. [1602] When any man doth bring any new trade into the realm or any engine tending to the furtherance of a trade that never was used before the king may grant him a monopoly patent. (Noy. R. 182, 1 Web. P. C. 6.) (g) EDGEBERRY v. STEPHENS. [1691] If an invention be new in England, a patent may be granted, though the thing was practised beyond sea before, for the Statute 21 Jac. 1, speaks of new manufactures within this realm, so that if it be new here it is within the Statute. (2 Salk. 447; Comb. 84; Dav. P. C. 36; 1 Web. P. C. 35.) A party availing himself of information from abroad is an inventor within 21 Jac. 1 ch. 3, sect. 6. (8 C. B. 679.) (i) WALTON v. BATEMAN. [1842] The party obtaining the patent must be the true and first inventor in this country. If he import from a foreign country that which others at the time of the making of such letters patent and grants did not use it will suffice. (1 Web. P. C. 615.) |