Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Patents

Co-proprietors Dev and Esha are deadlocked: Esha refuses to agree to a licence Dev wants to grant, and no agreement between them covers it. Dev applies to the Controller, who gives directions, and Esha fails to sign the licence instrument within fourteen days of a written request. What may the Controller then do on Dev's application?

The Controller may give directions empowering any person to execute the instrument in Esha's name and on her behalf, after giving Esha an opportunity to be heard. The Act does not allow cancellation of the patent or transfer of her share.

  1. ACancel the patent for non-cooperation
  2. BEmpower any person to execute the instrument in Esha's name and on her behalfCorrect
  3. CTransfer Esha's share to Dev
  4. DGrant the licence without hearing Esha

Explanation

Under Section 51(2), if a registered proprietor fails to execute an instrument within fourteen days of written request, the Controller may give directions empowering any person to execute it in the name and on behalf of the defaulter. Section 51(3) requires that the person in default be heard first, so the hearing cannot be skipped, and nothing allows share transfer or cancellation.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Patents shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to PatentsFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Patents questions