Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“LexisLibrary gives us the most relevant and recent cases and always has the latest information on them. It makes research so much easier. We're more cost-effective for our clients and more efficient each day”

Advocates

Access all documents on Support of claims by description

Support of claims by description meaning

Published by a LexisNexis IP expert
What does Support of claims by description mean?
In patent practice, support of claims by description means each claim must be justified by, and consistent with, what the specification discloses, so the breadth of the claims reflects the technical teaching rather than isolated examples. In the UK this is required by section 14(5)(c) of the Patents Act 1977, and under the European Patent Convention by Article 84; Irish patent law and the EPC impose the same obligation for Irish national and European patents. Key features include: the need for a clear basis in the description for every claimed feature and generalisation; claims that are not unduly broader than the teaching; and coherence between embodiments, definitions and claim scope. Support is examined by the UKIPO and EPO during prosecution and when amending; amendments must remain supported and avoid added matter (for example, under section 76/Article 123(2) EPC). Post‑grant, lack of support/clarity is not generally a standalone ground for revocation, so challenges typically proceed via insufficiency or added‑matter, with “plausibility” sometimes informing whether the specification credibly supports the full claim scope. Practice is broadly consistent across England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (Patents Act 1977) and Ireland, though case law developments under the EPC guide detailed application.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related Practice Notes about Support of claims by description

PRACTICE NOTES
UK Enterprise Investment Scheme: investor reliefs, conditions, claims and withdrawal; CGT deferral/exemption; BADR; advance assurance and funds; Budget 2025 changes and higher EIS/VCT company limits from April 2026

FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government announced that the upfront income tax relief available to an individual investing in a VCT will fall from 30% to 20%. By contrast, the upfront income tax relief for EIS remains at 30%. The government also outlined three changes affecting both the EIS and VCT schemes. Specifically, the following adjustments were confirmed: an increase to the annual investment limits that companies can raise under the EIS and VCT schemes, moving from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge-intensive companies (KICs) an increase in the lifetime company risk finance investment limit, rising from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs respectively an increase to the gross assets limit that an investee company must not exceed, going from £15m to £30m before the shares are issued, and from £16m to £35m after that point These...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Support of claims by description

PRECEDENTS
Precedent client memo on disclosure, document preservation and legal professional privilege: guidance for employees on control, metadata and communications in civil litigation (England and Wales)

This template memorandum should be read and, if suitable, sent together with the relevant template letter to your client regarding disclosure: Draft letter to client about disclosure—small claims track Draft letter to client about disclosure Confidential and privileged [ insert date ] [ insert addressees: [ insert addressees: senior managers/relevant employees and former employees/IT managers ] ] [ [ insert case heading ] OR [ description of the case if pre-action ] ] [ [ We ] OR [ the company ] ] may encounter a legal dispute in relation to [ insert matter/transaction subject of dispute ]. If the dispute is not brought to a conclusion, it is probable that we will be required to disclose relevant documents, including electronic records, that are or have been within [ [ our ] OR [ the company’s ] ] control, whether or not they support our case. That said, some relevant documents are protected from inspection (that is, actually seen)...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Witness Statement: Office-Holder Applications to Set Aside Preferences or Transactions at an Undervalue (England and Wales), Insolvency Act 1986

Applicant and Statement Details Applicant(s): [ insert initials and surname ] Statement number: [ insert number of witness statement eg 1st ] Exhibit: [ insert exhibit description ] Date: [ insert date of witness statement ] Case No: [ insert case number ] [ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST (ChD) OR IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS IN [ insert location ] INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST (ChD) OR IN THE COUNTY COURT AT [ insert location ] BUSINESS AND PROPERTY WORK ] [ IN THE MATTER OF [ insert company’s name ] OR IN THE MATTER OF [ insert bankrupt’s name ] IN BANKRUPTCY ] AND IN THE MATTER OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986 BETWEEN [ Insert name(s) of the Applicant(s) ] Applicant(s) AND [ Insert name(s) of the Respondent(s) ] Respondent(s) Witness statement number [ INSERT NUMBER ]...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Witness statement precedent for office-holders: application to avoid a floating charge under s245 Insolvency Act 1986 (England and Wales)

Applicant(s): [ insert initials and surname ]; Statement number: [ insert number of witness statement eg 1st ]; Exhibit: [ insert exhibit description ]; Date: [ insert date of witness statement ]; CASE NO: [ insert case number ] [ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES, INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST (ChD) OR IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS IN [ insert location ], INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST (ChD) OR IN THE COUNTY COURT AT [ insert location ] BUSINESS AND PROPERTY WORK ] IN THE MATTER OF [ insert company’s name ] AND OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986 BETWEEN [ Insert name(s) of the Applicant(s) ] Applicant(s) AND [ Insert name(s) of the Respondent(s) ] Respondent(s) [ INSERT NUMBER ] WITNESS STATEMENT OF [ INSERT NAME OF OFFICE-HOLDER ] I, [ insert name of the office-holder ], of [ insert the office-holder's business address ], state as follows: General ...

Read More Right Arrow