DDC machines contract: Court awards N17.3bn cost against INEC, Jega The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, yesterday, found the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, and its Chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega, guilty of infringing on the patent rights of an indigenous company, Bedding Holdings Limited, BHL, who it awarded contracts worth N34.5billion for the purchase of Direct Data Capturing, DDC, machines for voters’ registration in 2010. The high court, in its judgment, maintained that having gone through the totality of evidence adduced before it by both the company and INEC, it was satisfied that the electoral body, violated a subsisting patent right over the process, application and use of DDC machines for voters’ registration, solely acquired ab initio by the firm. The CJ held that in the award and execution of the contracts, INEC, its chairman and three companies involved in the transaction, infringed on a valid right of the plaintiff. Consequently, the court ordered INEC, Jega and the others to pay BHL N17.25 billion as compensation for infringing on its valid and subsisting patent rights. Specifically, BHL had in the suit filed by its lawyer, John Okoriko, alleged that INEC and Jega, infringed on its patented rights over the process and application of DDC machines for the compilation and collection of various bio-data by awarding contracts for the purchase and deployment of the DDC machines for the compilation of the voters register without its consent. Joined with INEC and Jega as defendants in the matter were the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, and the companies to which INEC awarded the contracts , Haier Electrical Appliances Corporation Limited, Zinox Technologies Ltd and Avante International Technology. In his verdict, Justice Auta, upheld Okoriko’s argument and evidence to the effect that the plaintiff was the sole owner of the patent rights over the process and that its rights was infringed by the conduct of the defendants, except the AGF. He held that although the AGF was not a party to the transaction, as the nation’s chief law officer and a relevant officer in the execution of orders made against the government or its agents, he was a necessary party in the case. Justice Auta further held that the nation’s Patent and Design Act precludes anybody from using a patented invention without the consent of the inventor. He said Section 6 of the Act provided for the protection of a patent right, adding that it was the duty of the court to ensure such protection. He also frowned on the decision of INEC and Jega to award the contracts without BHL’s consent, despite being aware it had the patent right over the invention. “INEC, like every other government agencies has the responsibility of obeying the law of the land. “INEC as an electoral body should realise that the business of election is important. It touches on the life of the nation. “So, INEC should always play by the rule, so that its conduct does not affect the outcome of elections,” the judge said. Justice Auta stressed that from the preponderance of evidence before him, the plaintiff and its chairman, Chief Sylvester Odigie, did not appear as people who wished to reap from where they did not sow, especially as he (Odigie) had been awarded national honours for productivity. The judge noted that the country’s’ President, in 1997, awarded Odigie Nigeria’s highest order of honour and dignity for productivity and order of merit for his remarkable contribution to national development as themost productive individual that year. Justice Auta declared that from the evidence before his court, BHL owned the patent right No: RP16642 and copyrights designs No: RD13841 over Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes (ECTBB) and Patent rights No: RP NG/P/2010/202 over Proof of Address System/Scheme, PASS, embedded with the coded metal plate, process and application of the products to produce voters’ register. The CJ further declared that BHL was entitled to 50 per cent of the contract sum of N34, 517,640,000, which is N17, 258,820,000, being the minimum reasonable royalty accruable to the plaintiff for unauthorised use of its invention. He, therefore, ordered INEC and the other defendants to, henceforth, obtain the consent of the plaintiff before procuring and utilising the DDC machines for voters’ registration and related purposes.
Posted on: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 01:15:06 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015