The court of the commissioner of patents, seated in Pretoria, has handed down judgment in the matter of Sasol Dyno Nobel (Pty) Limited v African Explosives Limited.
The court of the commissioner of patents, seated in Pretoria, has handed down judgment in the matter of Sasol Dyno Nobel (Pty) Limited v African Explosives Limited. The court had to decide whether, in patent infringement actions, the reliance by a defendant on an allegation that a patent includes claims made in conflict with the provisions of Section 51 of the Patents Act no. 57 of 1978 constitutes a competent defence.
An action for the infringement of South African patent number 1991/2194, entitled “Low energy blasting initiation system and surface connection therefore”, as twice amended, was instituted by Sasol against African Explosives. In response to the action, African Explosives counterclaimed for the revocation of the patent on the basis of its alleged invalidity.
In its defence, and as a basis for the counterclaim, African Explosives relied, inter alia, on the inclusion in the patent of claims introduced by way of amendment to the patent. These amendments were alleged to have been made in conflict with the provisions of Section 51 of the act.
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at firstname.lastname@example.org
technology, Sasol, African Explosives, South Africa Patent Act