Patents Act 1977
The Patents Act 1977 is the principal patent legislation in the United Kingdom. It was enacted to align UK patent law with the European Patent Convention (EPC) and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). The Act defines the requirements for patentability (novelty, inventive step, industrial application), the categories of excluded subject matter (discoveries, scientific theories, mathematical methods, literary works, business methods, and computer programs as such), and the rights conferred by a patent. The Act also established the Patents Court (part of the High Court) and the Intellectual Property Office. The Act has been amended by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the Patents Act 2004.
Legal area: Intellectual property law protects creations of the mind, including inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, symbols, and names used in commerce.
Citation: Patents Act 1977 (1977 c 37)
Full text: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/37
Key Provisions
- Section 1: Patentable inventions (novelty, inventive step, industrial application)
- Section 2: Novelty (state of the art, absolute novelty)
- Section 3: Inventive step (person skilled in the art, obviousness)
- Section 4: Industrial application (capable of being made or used in industry)
- Section 60: Infringement (making, disposing, using, importing, keeping)
- Section 72: Grounds for revocation of patent
- Section 125: Extent of invention (interpretation of claims)
Significance
The Patents Act 1977 harmonised UK patent law with European standards. The exclusion of computer programs ‘as such’ from patentability has been extensively litigated, with UK courts applying the Aerotel/Macrossan test (four-step approach) which differs from the European Patent Office’s ’technical contribution’ approach as established in decisions like HTC v Apple (2013). The Act has been tested in ground-breaking cases including Human Genome Sciences v Eli Lilly (2011) on industrial application of gene sequences, and the Act’s infringement provisions in Actavis v ICOS (2019) on the doctrine of equivalents.