
Unilever Stole This Product Idea from a Scientist, 13 Years Later Justice Has Been Served

Waging a legal war against a corporate giant is no easy feat but it is a battle worth fighting for, especially when there is grave injustice involved. Take a look at Professor Ian Shanks, who had fought long and hard for 13 years over a creation that is now widely used but was never credited to him. Finally, justice was served after the United Kingdom’s highest court ordered Unilever to pay him over $2.5 million.
From a Toy and Plastic Film
The 71-year-old invented the electrochemical capillary device in 1982, only using his daughter’s glass slide from a toy microscope, plastic film, and bulldog clips. At the time, the scientist was working under a subsidiary of Unilever and it was the newest LCD technology that prompted the development of the capillary device. Ian was particularly drawn to making something that could measure blood glucose levels, which would later become one of the most crucial inventions for diabetes patients.

Ian Shanks’ invention is now used with glucose monitoring tech
He took the invention to his boss, who then said that the company already owned it. Later, Unilever patented the device and started selling the technology to other brands in the 1990s. The technology found its way into many glucose testing devices widespread nowadays, which are mostly used by people with diabetes to monitor their glucose levels.
After more than a decade, the Supreme Court finally awarded the professor what was rightfully his. Ian first came out in 2006, accusing the giant company of making millions from his creation without giving him any credit or monetary compensation. However, he had previously lost the case and had to refile his complaint.
Right to a Fair Share
Thankfully, this time the court unanimously favored with Ian recently, explaining that the invention indeed had given Unilever outstanding benefits, ordering the company to justly compensate its creator.
Judge Lord Kitchin said that the giant company enjoyed significant rewards and tons of money from the creation that the inventor should be entitled to a fair share.
The judge further explained that Unilever received about $30 million from patents, while Ian wasn’t given a single penny. Despite agreeing that the rights to the creation were owned by the mammoth brand, the court said Ian deserves to get his reward.

Unilever was not happy with the decision
Unsurprisingly, Unilever was not happy with the decision. A spokesperson argued that they were disappointed because of the overturn of the past judgments and that the scientist was awarded a portion of the license revenue on top of his bonus, salary, and benefits when he was still an employee, working for the company’s R&D department.
Bumpy Road
The road to winning this battle was not without bumps. In 2007, Ian survived a heart attack and add to that the stress the legal fight was giving him. Despite the stumble, he persisted because he was driven to help other investors. Regarding his compensation, most of it would go to legal expenses, nevertheless, he was still happy that the bout is finally over.

The inventor suffered a heart attack a year after he applied for compensation
In his argument, the scientist said that Uniliver had violated the Patents Act that was introduced 30 years ago. Under this law, employees who created a product for their companies are entitled to a fair share as long as the company enjoyed an outstanding benefit from the invention.
More in Criminal Attorney
-
Understanding Market Abuse Letters and Their Growing Significance
The financial markets thrive on trust, transparency, and accountability. Protecting these pillars is a top priority for regulators like the Financial...
November 29, 2024 -
Identity Verification Explained – Methods, Benefits, and Challenges
In a rapidly advancing digital landscape, where interactions and transactions are increasingly happening online, the need for effective identity verification has...
November 20, 2024 -
Want Better Legal Service? Learn How to Scare a Lawyer Into Taking Action
If you’re involved in a legal case, or perhaps you’re an attorney working with clients in litigation, you may have wondered...
November 15, 2024 -
Facebook & Instagram to Launch Facial Recognition Technology to Combat Celebrity Scam Ads
Meta, the tech giant behind Facebook and Instagram, is taking a bold new step to combat the surge of celebrity scam...
November 5, 2024 -
How AI Legal Drafting Tools Are Transforming In-House Legal Teams
The rise of AI legal drafting tools is reshaping in-house legal teams, enhancing efficiency, accuracy, and control. Generative AI, in particular,...
November 1, 2024 -
What is Account Takeover, How Does It Happen & How Dangerous Is It? A Comprehensive Guide
Account takeover (ATO) is one of the fastest-growing forms of identity fraud today. This sneaky cyberattack occurs when fraudsters gain unauthorized...
October 25, 2024 -
What Kamala Harris Did As A Prosecutor Tells a Lot About Her Approach Toward Criminal Justice
When examining Kamala Harris as a prosecutor, you get a complex picture of a leader who made tough decisions, some of...
October 18, 2024 -
Shakira Tax Fraud Case: Singer Pushes Back, Claims Discrimination
Shakira, the Colombian pop star celebrated for her global hits, is embroiled in a significant legal battle over allegations of tax...
October 8, 2024 -
Here’s Why Asking ChatGPT For Legal Advice is A Bad Idea
With the rise of AI tools like ChatGPT, people are increasingly turning to it for quick solutions to various problems, including...
October 5, 2024