0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

patent court says coffee capsules are not a ‘staple commercial product’

23 April 2013

Section 60(3) of the Patents Act says supplying staple commercial products is not contributory patent infringement.

In Nestec v Dualit, Arnold J considered what is a staple commercial product.

He cited Pavel v Sony, which said “in ordinary language, a staple commercial product is a commodity or raw material” and staple commercial products are “of a kind which is needed every day and can be generally obtained”.

He also referred to the Australian decision in Northern Territory of Australia v Collins, which said a staple commercial product “must ordinarily be one which is supplied commercially for a variety of uses”.

As the defendants’ coffee capsules had “no other use other than with a limited range of portionised coffee machines”, they were not staple commercial products.

What amounts to an easily obtained daily necessity varies hugely between organisations, and this element of the test is unenlightening. But the ‘variety of uses’ test is helpful, particularly in the context that most staples are commodities or raw materials.

related opinions

Can an application to postpone a hearing be refused?

This case highlights the importance of Claimants obtaining their own medical evidence in such matters especially when it is pivotal to their claim.

View blog

A landlord’s promise, a tenant’s power

When it comes to leases, most people believe that landlords hold most of the power. However, in relation to long residential leases, the tables may well have recently turned in one respect at least following a recent Supreme Court decision.

View blog

Sky’s overly broad trade marks narrowed as found partially invalid for bad faith

Lord Justice Arnold has applied the guidance of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to the evidence before him, in the long standing trade mark dispute between Sky and Skykick.

View blog

High Court extends employer’s duty of care to Dubai whistleblower

Employers with global networks which include a base in the UK should be aware that they can face expensive and damaging negligence claims from employees who are based overseas regardless of the whistleblowing regime.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up