Introduction
On 11 January 2021 – in an apparent conclusion to the patent at the heart of the Federal Court s decision in
Yves Choueifaty v Attorney General of Canada (2020 FC 837) – the commissioner of patents allowed Canadian Patent Application 2635393 (CA 393) in Commissioner s Decision 1556 (CD1556) (2021 CACP 3).
CD1556 provides insight into how the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) will:
approach patentable subject matter in future; and
apply the new guidelines on patentable subject matter released in response to
Choueifaty (see below).
The Federal Court rejected CIPO s problem-solution approach for determining patentable subject matter in
Choueifaty (for further details please see Federal Court rejects problem-solution approach, opening field for computer-implemented inventions ). The Federal Court found that this previous approach disregarded the intention of the inventor contrary to the purposive claims construction required by the Supreme Court o
Decisions
The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office (HIPO) rejected the application, holding that it was descriptive. It referred to the European Court of Justice s (ECJ s)
Biomild judgment (C-265/00), which held that word combinations which comprise the juxtaposition of several non-distinctive elements remain descriptive and cannot be considered unusual.
The applicant requested a review by the Metropolitan Tribunal, which was rejected. The tribunal agreed with the HIPO in respect of the lack of distinctiveness of the word combination for which the applicant had applied. Moreover, it held that the evidence that the applicant had filed was irrelevant in respect of distinctiveness. It did not prove acquired distinctiveness (ie, intensive use extended in time and space).
This article discusses the significant Supreme Court decision in Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell Plc(1) which considered parent company liability. This decision on jurisdiction provides helpful guidance on the circumstances in which a UK-domiciled parent company may owe a common law duty of care in respect of the actions of a foreign subsidiary.
Facts
The claimants, comprised of 42,355 individuals from the Niger Delta region, brought a claim in negligence against Royal Dutch Shell (RDS), incorporated in England, and one of its Nigerian subsidiaries, Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd (SPDC).
In summary, the claimants alleged that they had suffered substantial environmental damage as a result of oil spills and pollution from pipelines operated by SPDC in Nigeria, such that natural water sources used for drinking water, fishing, agricultural, washing or recreational purposes were no longer safe to use. The claimants argued that RDS owed them a common law duty of care on
Parliament recently approved Bill 7637, which modified the Law of 5 April 1993 on the financial sector and the Law of 6 April 2013 on dematerialised securities. The bill introduces important modifications with respect to the direct issuance of dematerialised securities using distributed ledger technology (DLT) and strengthens Luxembourg's position as one of the most DLT-friendly and important financial hubs in the European Union.
IVASS (the Italian insurance regulator) has approved changes to its Regulation 14 of 18 February 2008 concerning portfolio transfers. The order affects domestic (ie, Italian) insurers and Italian branches of third-country insurers involved in a portfolio transfer transaction and those entitled to insurance benefits deriving from polices issued by the ceding undertaking. The changes aim to allow greater flexibility in the management of insurance business.