IP-2024-000057 - [2025] EWHC 1687 (IPEC)

Mr Hibbert may or may not be right to say that 30% of hoists are not fitted according to their manufacturer’s instructions. That is a general statement and does not establish any figure in respect of the Apex Assist, specifically not in relation to the securing of the extension element. Mr Shaw was firmly of the view that the skilled person would not consider securing the extension element other than by tightening the grub screws into blind holes according to the manufacturer’s instructions. This was on safety grounds and because any other method would invalidate the warranty. He said that to secure the extension otherwise than in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions would be irresponsible. Mr Hibbert agreed in cross-examination that this would be irresponsible and said that he would not do it.

It follows from this and my finding of law that at the time of supply of the Apex Assist it would have been obvious both to JGL and to a reasonable person in the circumstances that relevant fitters would all implement Adjustment 3 by tightening the grub screws into the blind holes. Consequently, it would not have been obvious that relevant fitters will intend to put the invention into effect when fitting the Apex Assist.

The allegation of infringement pursuant to s.60(2) of the 1977 Act does not succeed.