Skip to content

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

Meera and Kabir are registered joint grantees of a patent. There is no agreement between them. Kabir wants to grant a licence to a Singapore company, a PCT-related partner, without telling Meera. He also sells a patented article to a buyer in Chennai. Which statement is correct under the Patents Act, 1970?

Kabir needs Meera's consent to grant the licence, because co-owners cannot license without the others' consent absent an agreement. However, the buyer of an article sold by one co-owner may deal with it as if it had been sold by a sole patentee.

  1. AKabir cannot grant the licence without Meera's consent, but the Chennai buyer can deal with the article as if sold by a sole patenteeCorrect
  2. BKabir may grant the licence alone, as each co-owner holds an equal undivided share
  3. CKabir cannot grant the licence, and the Chennai buyer's rights in the article are limited until Meera consents
  4. DKabir may grant the licence only if he accounts to Meera for the profits

Explanation

Under Section 50(3), absent an agreement, a licence cannot be granted by one co-owner except with the consent of the others. Under Section 50(4), a purchaser of a patented article sold by one co-owner may deal with it as if sold by a sole patentee. The third option wrongly restricts the buyer, and the fourth wrongly makes accounting a substitute for consent.

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