Shanks v Unilever Plc 2019 UKSC 45

The invention of the electrochemical capillary fill device (ECFD) represented an important development for blood glucose sensors but the inventor, Professor Ian Shanks, never saw a penny himself. In this case we follow his bid to be compensated properly for his work and critique the factors that are taken into account when the courts arrive at a decision in cases like this.
Music from bensound.com

[@elizabethlondon7078]

I love you videos Marcus! They are so helpful and clear. Just wanna say thanks for taking time to help all of us stressed out law students, you are amazing! :)

[@marcuscleaver]

You are very welcome! Thanks for the lovely comment! :)

[@eshaudeshika8197]

Hi Marcus! Absolutely love your videos on EU law eventhough they need a bit of updating, I refer to your videos to get through EU law.
I've got a question, its not related to this video, just figured chances of you seeing the comment here could be more likely as it is a new video.
I was wondering about if a presidential order from the President of the EU commission would be a binding act for an annulment action.

[@marcuscleaver]

You are best reading Case T‑713/16 to review the arguments on this point.

[@eshaudeshika8197]

@@marcuscleaver you are literally the best!!

[@justsomeguywithoutamustach9775]

Wait, so who won the case?

[@amritlohia8240]

Professor Shanks did