Claydon Yield-O-Meter Ltd v Mzuri Ltd & Ors (Rev 1)

Decision date: 17 May 2021

Neutral citation: [2021] EWHC 1322 (IPEC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

The claimant’s patent infringement claim was dismissed following a remote hand-down of judgment on 22 April 2021. The court held that a remote hand-down under the Covid-19 Protocol does constitute the "hearing at which the decision to be appealed was made" for CPR 52.3(2)(a), but there was no automatic or implied adjournment to permit a retrospective permission application. The court therefore had no jurisdiction to grant permission and the 21‑day period for filing an appellant’s notice had expired; any extension must be sought from the Court of Appeal.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

The hearing at which a decision is made, for the purposes of CPR 52.3(2)(a), is the hearing at which the judgment is handed down, whether in open court or remotely under the Covid-19 Protocol; an adjournment to treat a permission application as made "at" that hearing must be formally ordered by the court on application, and the 21‑day time limit for filing an appellant’s notice runs from the decision date.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: high

The judgment contains non-binding observations that parties should decide before hand-down whether they will seek permission to appeal and, where attendance is excused, written applications (or pre-circulated draft reserved judgments) may properly be used to seek permission; parties seeking adjournments should also seek an extension of time for filing an appellant’s notice as a precaution.

Warning

Chunk contains substantial repetition of the same passages.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML