Patent Disputes In Green Hydrogen India.
Green hydrogen is an emerging industry in India, and while there are relatively few reported cases strictly about green hydrogen patents, there are notable disputes involving patents, technology ownership, and regulatory challenges that impact the sector.
1. Independent Green Hydrogen Producers Association v. Union of India & Ors. (2023–2024)
Court: Delhi High Court
Issue: Tender-related dispute with implications for proprietary technology
Facts:
The association challenged a major green hydrogen tender issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) to set up a large green hydrogen plant.
They argued that the tender gave an unfair advantage to certain technology holders and restricted competition.
Although this was not a traditional patent infringement case, it involved proprietary technologies and commercial rights tied to patents and know-how.
Outcome:
The court noted the potential unfair advantage but did not directly rule on patent rights.
IOCL canceled the tender, and the petition was withdrawn as moot.
Significance:
Demonstrates how patent and proprietary technology rights indirectly influence market access in India’s green hydrogen industry.
2. Star Scientific Limited v. Controller of Patents & Designs (2024)
Court: High Court (Patent Appeal)
Issue: Patent rejection for hydrogen-related technology
Facts:
Star Scientific filed a patent for a new hydrogen production process.
The Indian Patent Office had rejected the application citing lack of inventive step and insufficient disclosure.
Star Scientific appealed, arguing that the Patent Office misapplied legal standards.
Outcome:
The court upheld the patent office’s discretion but emphasized the need for fair procedure in examination.
Significance:
Highlights challenges innovators face in India when securing patents for cutting-edge hydrogen technologies.
3. Intelligent Energy Limited v. Controller General of Patents (2024)
Court: Madras High Court
Issue: Patent validity dispute for fuel cell and hydrogen technology
Facts:
Intelligent Energy filed a patent for a fuel cell system that generates hydrogen.
The patent office initially rejected it for lack of novelty and inventive step.
Outcome:
The High Court remanded the application for fresh examination and clarification of inventive step.
Significance:
Shows the rigor of Indian patent law in assessing hydrogen innovations.
Courts can intervene to ensure fair evaluation, which is critical for emerging green hydrogen technologies.
4. FMC Corporation v. Natco Pharma Limited (Process Patent Case)
Court: Delhi High Court
Issue: Process patent infringement (not hydrogen-specific, but illustrates legal principles)
Facts:
FMC sued Natco for allegedly infringing its chemical process patent.
The dispute involved whether Natco’s slightly different method fell under the patent claims.
Outcome:
The court held that Natco’s process was sufficiently different and did not infringe under the doctrine of equivalents.
Significance:
This case sets a precedent for process patents, which are highly relevant for hydrogen production methods.
Green hydrogen innovators must clearly define process patents to avoid disputes.
5. SunHydrogen Nanoparticle Technology Patent (India, 2023–2024)
Nature: Patent grant and strategic positioning for hydrogen tech
Facts:
SunHydrogen patented a nanoparticle-based green hydrogen production system in India.
This patent is crucial for protecting proprietary electrolysis technology.
Significance:
Although no litigation occurred yet, this sets the stage for future infringement disputes if local companies copy or use similar technology.
6. Hydrogen Electrolyzer Technology Disputes (Hypothetical/Precedent Cases)
Context:
Several Indian companies and foreign joint ventures are filing patents for electrolyzer technologies and catalysts.
Disputes are likely to arise over:
Use of patented catalysts for hydrogen production.
Methods of coupling solar or wind energy with electrolysis.
Licensing agreements for proprietary electrolyzer designs.
Legal Principles:
Indian patent law requires novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
Courts often examine process vs. product claims carefully, as seen in FMC v. Natco.
Enforcement is possible only after patent grant, and infringement claims require clear proof that patented steps are used.
7. Key Legal Takeaways for Green Hydrogen Patents in India
| Aspect | Observation |
|---|---|
| Patentability | Hydrogen technologies must meet strict novelty and inventive step standards. |
| Process vs Product Patents | Most green hydrogen patents are process-based (electrolysis, catalysis). Courts scrutinize differences in steps. |
| Regulatory Disputes | Many early disputes involve tenders and commercialization rights linked to proprietary technology. |
| Foreign vs Domestic Applicants | Foreign patent holders face challenges in Indian enforcement; local filings are easier to litigate. |
| Future Litigation | As the market grows, more direct patent infringement suits over electrolyzers, fuel cells, and green hydrogen methods are expected. |
Conclusion
India’s green hydrogen sector is still emerging, so most patent disputes involve patent prosecution, tender challenges, and process patents rather than large-scale infringement cases.
Courts have upheld strict scrutiny of patent claims, emphasized procedural fairness, and clarified that process steps must be clearly claimed to prevent infringement.
Patents like SunHydrogen’s nanoparticle-based system will likely lead to future litigation as green hydrogen production scales in India.
RELATED Blog
comments