A Victory for Innovative Employees? – Shanks v Unilever Plc (Case Comment) 

[1] Shanks v Unilever Plc [2019] UKSC 45, [2019] 1 WLR 5997, [2019] 10 WLUK 312 (SC).

[2] Hugh Dunlop and Janet Strath, ‘Shanks v Unilever: the sweet smell of success’ [2020] 15 JIPLP 76.

[3] Terence Broderick, ‘Shanks v Unilever – opening the floodgates?’ [2019] IT Law Today 5.

[4] Shanks (n 1) [31].

[5] Memco-Med’s Patent, In re [1992] RPC 403.

[6] Shanks (n 1)[84].

[7] Ibid [51].

[8] Ibid [52]-[54].

[9] Kelly v GE Healthcare Ltd [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat), [2009] RPC 363, [2009] 2 WLUK 263 (Ch D (Patents Ct)).

[10] Shanks (n 1) [56]-[59].

[11] GEC Avionics Ltd’s Patent, In re [1992] RPC 107.

[12] British Steel plc’s Patent, In re [1992] RPC 117

[13]Shanks (n 1) [39].

[14] ibid [70].

[15] Shanks (n 1) [47].

[16] Shanks (n 1) [48].

[17] Claire Howell, ‘Extra compensation for inventive employees: is our system equitable, unbiased and motivating?’ [2011] 4 IPQ 371.

[18] Claire Howell (n 19) 388.

[19] The “Arbeitnehmererfindergesetz” ArbnErfG (as amended 2002 & 2009).

[20] ‘lagen (1949:345) om rätten till arbetstagares uppfinningar’ (LAU, act on the right to employee inventions).

[21] Sara Linde, ‘Inventor Remuneration – Issues for a multinational company’ (Thesis IP Law, Stockholms universitet 2010) 20.

[22] Erin Duffin, ‘Ranking of the 10 countries who filed the most international patent applications in 2019’ (Statista, July 2020) <https://www.statista.com/statistics/256845/ranking-of-the-10-countries-who-filed-the-most-international-patent-applications/> accessed 13 November 2020.

[23] Shanks (n 1) [84].

[24] Claire Howell (n 24) 375.

[25] Emma Flett and John Patten, ‘Shanks v Unilever: Supreme Court lowers the bar for finding an outstanding benefit from employee inventions’ [2020] 42 EIPR 126.

Pages: 1 2 3