UK Supreme Court set for DABUS appeal

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

UK Supreme Court set for DABUS appeal

AI and human.jpeg

The UK’s top court will rule on whether the country’s patent law requires an inventor to be a human after an influential judge gave the DABUS team hope last year

The UK Supreme Court will hear a keenly awaited appeal over whether an artificial intelligence tool can be named as the inventor on a patent application tomorrow, March 2.

The hearing, which Managing IP will report live from, is the culmination of a legal campaign led by computer scientist Stephen Thaler and lawyer and academic Ryan Abbott.

Thaler and Abbott, who are part of an organisation called the Artificial Inventor Project, want the court to recognise the AI tool DABUS as the inventor of a patent covering a food storage system.

The project has filed patent applications in major jurisdictions naming DABUS, which was developed by Thaler, as the inventor.

Both the England and Wales High Court and Court of Appeal, as well as the UKIPO, said that UK patent law requires a natural person to be named as the inventor.

In its September 2021 judgment, the Court of Appeal voted 2-1 to reject the DABUS case.

But a dissenting opinion from the influential intellectual property judge Lord Justice Colin Birss gave a glimmer of hope to the DABUS case.

Birss said Thaler had met the requirements set out in the UK Patents Act 1977 by identifying whom he believed to be the inventor.

However, Birss did not comment more generally on whether the law should recognise machines as inventors.

An Australian judge did give a more explicit endorsement of the DABUS team’s position in a landmark Federal Court judgment issued in July 2021 but that finding was overturned last November.

Managing IP will attend the Supreme Court and report on the proceedings tomorrow.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Ranjna Mehta-Dutt, who moved to Chadha & Chadha after 25 years at Remfry & Sagar, says the firm plans to expand its life sciences practice through targeted recruitment and dedicated teams for bigger clients
The initial contempt of court claim targeted Stobbs and the firm’s client for allegedly interfering with the administration of justice
Acquisition of platform developed by Boehmert & Boehmert lawyer set to create a combined platform for patent drafting and prosecution in Europe
Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
Gift this article