HL Deb 27 July 1977 vol 386 cc1054-8

38 After Clause 20 insert the following new clause:

Information prejudicial to defence of realm or safety of public.

Security and Safety

.—(1) Where an application for a patent is filed in the Patent Office (whether under this Act or any treaty or international convention to which the United Kingdom is a party and whether before or after the appointed day) and it appears to the comptroller that the application contains information of a description notified to him by the Secretary of State as being information the publication of which might be prejudicial to the defence of the realm, the comptroller may give directions prohibiting or restricting the publication of that information or its communication to any specified person or description of persons.

(2) If it appears to the comptroller that any application so tiled contains information the publication of which might be prejudicial to the safety of the public, he may give directions prohibiting or restricting the publication of that information or its communication to any specified person or description of persons until the end of a period not exceeding three months from the end of the period prescribed for the purposes of section 15 above.

(3) While directions are in force under this section with respect to an application—

  1. (a) if the application is made under this Act, it may proceed to the stage where it is in order for the grant of a patent, but it shall not be published and that information shall not be so communicated and no patent shall be granted in pursuance of the application;
  2. (b) if it is an application for a European patent, it shall not be sent to the European Patent Office; and
  3. (c) if it is an international application for a patent, a copy of it shall not be sent to the International Bureau or any international searching authority appointed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty.

(4) Subsection (3)(b) above shall not prevent the comptroller from sending the European Patent Office any information which it is his duty to send that office under the European Patent Convention.

(5) Where the comptroller gives directions under this section with respect to any application, he shall give notice of the application and of the directions to the Secretary of State, and the following provisions shall then have effect—

  1. (a) the Secretary of State shall, on receipt of the notice, consider whether the publication of the application or publication or communication of the information in question would be prejudicial to the defence of the realm or the safety of the public;
  2. (b) if the Secretary of State determines under paragraph (a) above that the publication of the application or the publication or communication of that information would be prejudicial to the safety of the public, he shall notify the comptroller who shall 1056 continue his directions under subsection (2) above until they are revoked under paragraph (e) below;
  3. (c) if the Secretary of State determines under paragraph (a) above that the publication of the application or the publication or communication of that information would be prejudicial to the defence of the realm or the safety of the public he shall (unless a notice under paragraph (d) below has previously been given by the Secretary of State to the comptroller) reconsider that question during the period of nine months from the date of filing the application and at least once in every subsequent period of twelve months;
  4. (d) if on consideration of an application at any time it appears to the Secretary of State that the publication of the application or the publication or communication of the information contained in it would not, or would no longer, be prejudicial to the defence of the realm or the safety of the public he shall give notice to the comptroller to that effect; and
  5. (e) on receipt of such a notice the comptroller shall revoke the directions and may, subject to such conditions (if any) as he thinks fit, extend the time for doing anything required or authorised to be done by or under this Act in connection with the application, whether or not that time has previously expired.

(6) The Secretary of State may do the following for the purpose of enabling him to decide the question referred to in subsection (5)(c) above—

  1. (a) where the application contains information relating to the production or use of atomic energy or research into matters connected with such production or use, he may at any time do one or both of the following, that is to say, inspect and authorise the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority to inspect the application and any documents sent to the comptroller in connection with it; and
  2. (b) in any other case, he may at any time after (or, with the applicant's consent, before) the end of the period prescribed for the purposes of section 15 above inspect the application and any such documents;
and where that Authority are authorised under paragraph (a) above they shall as soon as practicable report on their inspection to the Secretary of State.

(7) Where directions have been given under this section in respect of an application for a patent for an invention and, before the directions are revoked, that prescribed period expires and the application is brought in order for the grant of a patent, then—

  1. (a) if while the directions are in force the invention is worked by (or with 1057 the written authorisation of or to the order of) a Government department, the provisions of sections 52 to 56 below shall apply as if—
    1. (i) the working were use made by virtue of section 52;
    2. (ii) the application had been published at the end of that period; and
    3. (iii) a patent had been granted for the invention at the time the application is brought in order for the grant of a patent (taking the terms of the patent to be those of the application as it stood at the time it was so brought in order); and
  2. (b) if it appears to the Secretary of State that the applicant for the patent has suffered hardship by reason of the continuance in force of the directions, the Secretary of State may, with the consent of the Treasury, make such payment (if any) by way of compensation to the applicant as appears to the Secretary of State and the Treasury to be reasonable having regard to the inventive merit and utility of the invention, the purpose for which it is designed and any other relevant circumstances.

(8) Where a patent is granted in pursuance of an application in respect of which directions have been given under this section, no renewal fees shall be payable in respect of any period during which those directions were in force.

(9) A person who fails to comply with any direction under this section shall be liable—

  1. (a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000; or
  2. (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine, or both."

Lord ORAM

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 38. This was referred to earlier. My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.—(Lord Oram.)

The Earl of HALSBURY

My Lords, I divided the House on this issue on the last occasion, but, with only 24 hours to go in the other place, this is not the time for a Cross-Bencher to initiate a game of ping-pong. I shall not press the matter to a Division, though I am not content with the inclusion of this clause in the Bill. Our allies may have similar clauses. I conceded in the previous debate that the French make it penal to publish the subject matter of a patent, whether it is in defence or any other field, for a certain specified period. But our law does not provide for this. The drafting of our law is completely ineffective, because you can steer a horse and cart through its provisions without the slightest difficulty.

First, you can publish anything you like. You deny yourself a patent by doing so, but you can publish anything you like in the Daily Express, Nature or a journal of a learned society and you have committed no wrong, whether it is the most precious defence secret or not. Secondly, if you choose to put it into the conversazione at the Royal Society and have a leading article about it in Nature, you are all right so far as the law is concerned, if you patented it 24 hours beforehand, so that the Patent Office has not had time to react. So that it is basically a silly clause but, in so far as, to my certain knowledge, we have lived with its prececessor since 1949, I do not think it is the kind of point of which we ought to make too much. We can go on living with it for the time being.

On Question, Motion agreed to.