Case Comment

Clay v.
Allcock & Co. Ld.

citation(s): [1906] 23 R.P.C. 745

copyright 1997 Donald M. Cameron, Aird & Berlis




The Decision

At p. 750:

"...It is part of the duty of a patentee to tell the public, by his Claim, taken with the Specification and Drawings, what he claims as his own, and what, therefore, they must not do without infringing the Patent; in other words, he must mark out, with adequate distinctiveness, the boundary of the territory that he claims to be exclusively his own."

At p. 750:

"Counsel for the Plaintiff urged the well-known principle in Patent law that a man need not state the effect or the advantage of his invention, if he describes his invention so as to produce it. But that is not true where he has to rely on the presence or absence of such effect or advantage as a part of the necessary delimitation. The fact that it is a mere consequence cannot be pleaded by him as an excuse for not putting it in, if the leaving it out leaves his invention inadequately defined."


Return to:

Cameron's IT Law: Home Page; Index

Cameron's Canadian Patent & Trade Secrets Law: Home Page; Index

JurisDiction Home Page