Patent decision

BL number
Concerning rights in
Hearing Officer
Mr R C Kennell
Decision date
14 December 2006
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc
Provisions discussed
PA 1977 sections 72, 74A and 107(4); PR 1995 rule 89A(1)
Costs, Revocation, Stay of proceedings
Related Decisions


The defendant sought security for costs, alleging reason to believe that L Ltd, the company of which P (the claimant identified on Form 2/77) was a director, might be unable to meet any costs. P indicated that insistence on security might enforce withdrawal and thought this would prevent the filing of evidence, contrary to the public interest. The hearing officer recognised that the likely strength of the claimant’s case might be a factor in deciding whether to order security and that this would be difficult to assess in this case without further evidence - as would any consideration ex parte by the comptroller in the public interest if the claimant withdrew. He suggested that a written opinion by the Patent Office might assist in these circumstances and stayed the proceedings for 6 weeks to allow the parties to consider this. (If the proceedings did eventually continue it should be clarified whether P or L Ltd was the claimant.)

Full decision O/345/06 PDF document28Kb