The English Courts Deny There Is A 'Right To Repair'

Traditionally, purchasers of patented products in the UK have thought that they have a "right to repair" the goods they buy, even where the repairs are extensive. In Schütz v Werit [2011] EWCA Civ 303, the English Court of Appeal rejected this approach.

Schütz had European patents protecting intermediate bulk containers (IBC) having a removable plastic inner bottle fitted into an outer protective cage. Werit were selling their own bottles to Delta, who fitted them into Schütz cages, and then sold the "cross-bottled" final product to fillers in competition with Schütz.

The High Court had decided that these activities did not infringe the patents which claimed the the total container. Although only a part of the claimed product, the lower court determined that it was the cages which embodied the inventive concept, and found no infringement as Werit were not making cages.

Giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Jacob LJ noted that it was an infringement to "make a ... product which is the subject-matter of the patent".

As a result, Jacob LJ determined that the question in the case is:

"The...