Introduction
1.Between 30 November 2012 and 16 May 2013 four patent applications concerning vanadium redox batteries were filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (“the PCT Applications”) in the names of the Claimant (“Mr Dichand”) and Dr Placido Spaziante as joint owners and inventors. 2.On 13 December 2013 by a written agreement (“the First Assignment”) the PCT Applications were assigned to Hydraredox Technologies Inc (“HTI”). The First Assignment was signed by Mr Dichand, Dr Spaziante and a director of HTI, Julian Sproule, who is married to Dr Spaziante’s step-daughter. On 4 September 2014 there was a second written agreement under the terms of which the PCT Applications were assigned to the Defendant (“HTHL”). HTHL is a company domiciled in England and controlled by Dr Spaziante and members of his family. The parties were agreed that both agreements should be treated as if governed by English law. 3.Mr Dichand says that he was induced into signing the First Assignment by a fraudulent misrepresentation made by Dr Spaziante a few days before 13 December 2013. Mr Dichand’s case is that because of the misrepresentation, and for alternative reasons which I will come to, there was no effective transfer of ownership of the PCT Applications by means of the First Assignment. 4.The PCT Applications have resulted in a number of patents having been granted around the world with further national and regional applications pending. Mr Dichand seeks a declaration that he and Dr Spaziante are joint owners of the PCT Applications and related rights, including granted patents, or alternatively that these are held on trust by HTHL for the benefit of Mr Dichand and Dr Spaziante. 5.Michael Edenborough QC appeared for Mr Dichand, Rupert Butler for HTHL.