Patent is the exclusive right granted for invention of the product. Patents and IPR are used by the companies to develop strategy. The current issue with the legalities of IPR is the obscure nature of the interpretation. Hence companies need to develop a strategy based on the legal clauses. In this case, there was analysis of the legal stance of Apimed and Brightwake and how it had affected the strategy of the company. This case was selected in this analysis because it is a newer case that has helped in greater understanding of the legal precedent and would help the modern business to frame their strategies based on the legal precedent of the cases. This case does not set new precedent for future cases. It however helps in understanding as to what can be patented and is considered a trade secret. The concept of using honey in wound care is a tricky notion that has been explained by the courts. This case has enabled to frame the future business strategies of the companies.
The events of the case also point towards the obscurity of the law, interpretation of the law and the processes involved in actual case law (Helmers, Love, and McDonagh, 2013). This particular case does not raise any new principles of the law. It however provides with a useful summary as to adopting the right approach in terms of legal principles. It helps in gaining understanding as to how successful appeal on invalidity and how the courts determine the contested validity. This case had helped Apimed and Brightwake as to how the certificate is issued and registered. This case helps the future infringements to be deterred and how the defense of invalidity would be rendered pointless. This case also points towards the claimant’s liability costs on a indemnity basis.