APPEAL COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 243, 2 July 1918, Page 7

APPEAL COURT

ALLKGED INFRINGEMENT OF A ' PATENT. Tho Appeal Court was engaged veslerday in the hearing of tliu Christchurch case, having reference to the alleged infringement of a patent covering a highpressure boiler connected with ordinary cooking ranges. The case was heard on Thursday and Friday of last week, fo thai yesterday was the third day ot hearing. * On the Bench were His Honour I lie Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Bis Honour Mr. Justice Chapman, and His Honour Mr. Justice Herdman.

The parties to Ihe dispute were Messrs. Seott Bros, and George Scott appellants, and Messrs'. 11. Hepburn and Son. respondents.

Mr. C. P. Skerrett, IC.C., with him Mr. A. P. Wright, of Chrifltchiirch, appeared for Ihe appellants, and Mr. S. (I. Raymond; K.C., with liini Mr. 11, F. von Hnnst, lor the respondents. This was an appeal from a- decision by His Honour Mr. Justice Sim, in the Supreme Court, Christchurclt, some lime ago. II: was alleged that tho defendants had at various times manufactured and sold high-pressure boilers constructed in accordance with tlio invention disclosed in tho specification of,tlie plaintiffs' letters patent. II was als:i claimed that the defendants had threatened to infringe the letters-patent, and claimed the right to make Ihe boilers as Ihey lud been doing. Tho plaintiffs, therefore, brought action, seelcingan injunction, claiming 4200 damages, or an inquiry as to tho damages sustained by tho plaintiffs by reason of the infringement, and that tlio defendants bo ordered lo deliver, to tlio plaintiffs, to be destroyed, all tho high-pressure boilers made by them in infringement of the letters-patent. For tho defence it was denied that tlio plaintiffs were tho legal owners of tho letters-patent, or thai there had been any infringement of thein. II: was also contended that the letters-patent were invalid for several reasons.

His Honour Mr. Justice Sim held Iha I; the plaintiffs' lctters-pateiic were invalid, and that tlio defendants were entitled to judgment, and judgment was entered accordingly. Yesterday, Mr. von Haast addressed the Court'at great length, arguing on points that woro not referred to by Mr. Raymond. Tho c.xso concluded at .1 p.m., when tho Court reserved its decision.