Nestec SA & Ors v Dualit Ltd & Ors: Poisonous Priority

No items found.
May 9, 2013
#
Elements
#
Litigation

Darren Smyth’s latest IPKat post is about the recent case of Nestec SA & Ors v Dualit Ltd & Ors concerning Nespresso coffee makers and their coffee capsules.

The judgement’s conclusions raised some interesting legal points, including the finding of invalidity of the priority claim, with the result that the patent lacked novelty over the Priority Document. This echoes the recently topical concept of the “Poisonous Divisional”.

Recent Case Reports

Orders to Produce Evidence at the UPC
19 August 2026
GC Aesthetics, Avient, IQIP and Dall Energy: four 2026 UPC rulings reveal how courts weigh proportionality, confidentiality and timing before ordering a party to produce evidence under Rule 190.
Replacement parts and the value of asserting a narrower claim combination
17 July 2026
The UPC's Düsseldorf Local Division found that Wessper's cartridges indirectly infringed Brita's patent, and that a narrower claim combination can turn a consumable into an essential element.
Late Applications for Provisional Measures Refused for Lack of Urgency
14 July 2026
In Ericsson v ASUSTeK, the Milan Local Division refused a provisional measures application filed 21 months into the case, finding continuing infringement and rising losses alone do not establish urgency.