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

No items found.
​
May 9, 2013
#
Elements
#
Litigation
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

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

See all Case Reports

UPC revokes provisional injunction on motorbike helmet intercoms system
29 June 2026
The UPC Local Division Milan revoked Cardo's provisional injunction against Reso, ruling its helmet intercom products fall outside the scope of EP4240194, neither literally nor by equivalence.
​
Preliminary objection on jurisdiction partially successful – UPC clarifies requirements of anchor-defendant jurisdiction for non-UPC territories
25 June 2026
The Hamburg Local Division let Nixu pursue US-based Infoblox in the UPC for Germany, France and Finland, but threw out the UK claim. To reach a non-UPC territory through an anchor defendant, a claimant must plead joint infringement there.
​
UPC applies party-driven equivalence test in absence of Court of Appeal guidance
25 June 2026
The Helsinki Local Division found AIM's TV-advertising patent valid but not infringed by TGI, and with no Court of Appeal ruling on equivalence yet, adopted the four-step test both sides put forward, the UPC following the parties' lead.
​