Tate & Lyle Technology Ltd v Roquette Frères, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), on appeal from the High Court of Justice, London  EWCA Civ 1049
The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal brought by the patentee, Roquette Frères (“Roquette”), against a decision of the Patents Court (Lewison J) that the patent-in-suit was invalid for lack of novelty.
The patent related to the cyristallisation of maltitol, a sugar substitute; its only claim being to “the use of maltotriitol to modify or control the form of maltitol crystals” (different crystal forms having different performance characteristics, e.g. flow behaviour). The appeal concerned primarily the issue of claim construction, in particular the interpretation of the words “use” and “modify or control” and whether the claim required a deliberate modification of the maltotriitol content in order to vary the crystal forms in the resulting maltitol.