http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2021/11/obituary-professor-margaret-sophia-moy.html
Obituary – Professor Margaret Sophia Moy Llewelyn (1962-2021)
Memorials
Margaret gave me the opportunity to move into law working on the Plant Intellectual Property Project in 1999. The timing of the project was incredible astute, just before the outcome of the Novartis case at the EPO, demonstrating her forward thinking, knowledge and understanding of the area. Her enthusiasm and insight inspired the project team to exceed expectations, resulting in the outcomes from the project feeding into the acquis communautaire of the Community Plant Variety Rights regime. I am hugely indebted to Margaret for giving me the opportunity to work with her and passing on some of her knowledge and expertise, which stood me in good stead in the following years.
I met Margaret a couple of times (including on one occasion where we chatted about plant IP). Mainly, I knew Margaret through her role as editor of the IPQ and her tome (with Mike Adcock) on European Plant Intellectual Property. The book is a wonderful addition to the literature on what is a complex but usually overlooked and under-analysed area of IP Law. Margaret tackled this area with rigour and clarity, and I found her work to be immensely useful. In her editorial capacity, Margaret was warm, highly professional and a pleasure to deal with as an author. She made an enormous contribution to the discipline wearing her IPQ editorial hat.
Margaret and I made our entry into academic life in the intellectual property field in the late 1980s and early 1990s, a point at which interest in the subject was really taking off, and the intellectual leaders – Bill Cornish, Gerald Dworkin and Jim Lahore – seemed as formidable as the subject “intellectual property” itself. Encountering Margaret at conferences and events was always a delight. She made people around her feel comfortable, was kind, funny and very entertaining. Most importantly, in those early days of our careers she was hugely supportive, wonderfully reassuring and full of common-sense. She freely shared her ideas about how to teach – I recall clearly one conversation on the difficulties of teaching non-obviousness to undergraduate law students which revealed to me that the devil was the detail (the various formulae, tests and sub-tests), and the educational goal should be to convey the key ideas underpinning the non-obviousness inquiry. Margaret’s research projects broke new ground: exploring aspects of the field that had been neglected and bringing to those projects both a well-founded scepticism and an openness towards alternative research methods. However, most of all, I will remember Margaret as one of the most generous and fun colleagues with whom I have ever had the good fortune to spend time. I’m sorry there won’t be more such opportunities.
I met Margaret in 1987, when we were both appointed to junior positions at QMC. We shared a very small office in the East End premises of the college, which I had to vacate as she was courting Rob at the time and the only available trysting place was the Jewish cemetery outside the window. Margaret introduced me to the arcana of plant breeder’s rights as expounded by her supervisor Noel Byrne. She will be sadly missed.
It is nearly thirty years since I first met Margaret. This was soon after she had been appointed to her CLIP lectureship at the University of Sheffield. Over lunch, it transpired that we shared a Welsh connection: Margaret told me that her mother, who, had recently moved to Snowdonia, was living just outside Bangor and, much to Margaret’s surprise, I told her that Bangor was my own home city. More importantly, although the law relating to plant breeders’ rights was not my thing, we shared an interest in the way in which developments in genetics were impacting on questions of patentability in Europe. At all events, over a series of conversations with Margaret, the idea formed that it might be interesting to explore how different areas of law—not only IP law but also insurance, employment, criminal, and family law—were engaging with, and being impacted by, the new genetics. Following discussions with Bill Cornish, our topic of ‘law and genetics’ was narrowed to ‘law and human genetics’; and, with Bill’s encouragement, a number of exploratory papers were presented at a workshop in Cambridge, leading to a special issue of the Modern Law Review which was then re-published by Hart. This was just one of several initiatives that generated further conferences and publications all of which contributed to a distinctive law and biotech research profile at Sheffield. It was an exciting time and throughout this period, when we were colleagues at Sheffield, Margaret was a key player, more than living up to her billing as a rising star, and always a joy to work with.
I met Margaret many times over the years, but it was only about four years ago that I feel I got to know her properly when she kindly agreed to return to Sheffield to teach patents for us. Working alongside her allowed me to fully appreciate her depth of learning. She also turned out to be great fun as a colleague and was highly respected by the students. She deserves to be remembered as a gifted and modest scholar who didn’t take the world or herself too seriously.
Margaret was an academic of formidable intellectual, a leader in her fields who approached her subject with rigour and finesse (and made them accessible to lesser mortals such as myself!). Yet she combined all this with the warmest of personalities and a sparking sense of humour. My introduction to Margaret was via her editorship of the Intellectual Property Quarterly. She was always helpful in this role and able to give creative advice/criticism without undermining fragile academic egos. Indeed what really endeared her to me in her role as editor was the care she took with new arrivals on the IP scene: she would ask me for reviews of submitted papers but make it clear that she expected a useful signpost for the future even if the recommendation was to reject this time. A lovely person who had a lot more to give.
I am extremely sad that Margaret has died. I examined her excellent Ph.D dissertation in Aberystwyth in 1990. Margaret presented her characteristically insightful research findings extremely well that afternoon. How shocking and sad that such a lovely and talented person has passed away much too soon.
I first met Margaret when she came to do a presentation at the University of Leicester while I was teaching there, during my first year as a lecturer in intellectual property. Subsequently, I met her at conferences and she was always fun to hang out with. I was thus delighted when she started teaching intellectual property in Nottingham in 2010. We both taught copyright tutorials. We had lots of lunches together in between the courses and we talked about intellectual property but also her house and dog, and her love of music. So much so that we went to a classical concert or two in Nottingham. After she stopped teaching in Nottingham and started again to do so in Sheffield, we stayed in touch. She came to some of the University of Nottingham’s commercial law centre’s intellectual property seminars. I will always remember her fondly, and how bubbly, direct and fun she was and always sharp and on the ball not only on intellectual property but anything. But what I will always remember about her is her kindness – she was always thinking of others, putting herself last.I was deeply shocked and sad that such a warm-hearted, unassuming yet so talented woman died so young. I will miss her a lot.
I first met Margaret when I presented a paper to the IP group at the Annual Conference of the SPTL (as it then was) in 1998. She was generous, supportive and incisive, qualities I came to know and appreciate well over the years since then. As well as knowing Margaret through her editorship of the Intellectual Property Quarterly, she was a meticulous and constructive external examiner for various IP programmes and modules at the University of Manchester for several years. Margaret’s warmth, optimism and goodwill always came through in her dealings with me, right up until some email exchanges earlier this summer. I will miss Margaret very much and send my deepest sympathy and condolences to all her family and friends.
I first met Margaret Lewellyn at the founding event of the University of Edinburgh’s Shepherd and Wedderburn Centre for Research in Intellectual Property and Technology, which in 2002 morphed into SCRIPT (Scottish Research Centre for Studies in Intellectual Property and Technology Law). She was on a panel of four which included Hector McQueen. She was the most outstanding of them all. I clearly remember thinking “who is this star?”, though try as I might I cannot remember the topic at all. We met from time to time thereafter at various events. Always a pleasure and stimulating.Margaret was an academic, but had her thinking firmly based on the real world rather than the abstract. That is what made her so good. Her work had real effects, For instance the European Commission’s theoretically minded civil servants came up with the idea of an EU Utility Model. Margaret’s 1996 paper was a big nail in it coffin. To my mind then and still now it is model for considering any form of IP reform. Start with where you are, consider the idea and most importantly how it would work in practice on the basis that everyone will try to use it or misuse it as best they can, whether it will, when operated by real people, guys good and bad, advance innovation or creation.We met from time to time at various conferences thereafter, though sadly not in the last 20 years or so. She was a joy of a human being. She did not deserve to lose her husband after long nursing him though Parkinsons. Nor to die so young.
I had the pleasure of “meeting” Margaret electronically in the early days of email in the early 1990s. I was researching utility models and found her work in that area absolutely vital in forming my own conclusions. (As I recall, we had a lively and fun disagreement on the subject!) At the time, it seemed as though she and I were just about the only academics in the world who were seriously studying utility models, so when I later turned my attention to plant breeder’s rights, it was such a delight to discover that Margaret was also immersed in that area. It has certainly been a pleasure to share these tiny, though growing, areas of IP study with such a generous and distinguished scholar as Margaret.
I first met Margaret, at the beginning of my academic career, when she was collaborating with Bill Cornish. I felt honoured and fortunate to start my career with these two to guide me; both such wonderful, kind and supportive people as well as leaders in intellectual property law. We organised a conference in Japan for the Sasakawa Foundation, and had such fun. I remember Margaret had a girlish twinkle in her eye, and a wonderful wardrobe of dresses. She spoke fondly of am-dram (amateur drama), and her father’s experience as a plant breeder which underpinned her interest in plant breeders’ rights. When she became a senior academic, it was clear that although she found her career very stimulating, she also felt its frustrations and valued the simplest things in life. Pottering at home with Rob and her little dog, Tam, was in her words, “absolute bliss”. When we both faced hard times, her words of advice were something I think she would like us all to remember:“be just as strong as you need to be but no more than you have to be. And for what it’s worth Rob’s and my ‘family’ motto – engraved on the whiskey cabinet which I guess in itself speaks volumes! – is “crack on not up”. By that we mean place self and well-being first.
Although we only met twice in person, Margaret and I shared amusing stories about the IP textbook that many thought she co-authored with Bill Cornish and I did with him on IP and genetics. Of course, she could easily have done the former, whereas I could not the latter. She was a lovely person who wore lightly her deep knowledge, and I felt never got the credit she deserved. RIP Margaret Llewelyn from David of that ilk (although unrelated).
I am shocked and sad to be writing in the wake of the far too premature death of Margaret Llewelyn. In a sub-discipline where we are constantly concerned with the value of openness Margaret was a model of a broader way of being open personally and intellectually. In her role as editor of the Intellectual Property Quarterly she enthusiastically welcomed high quality work written from a range of methodological, theoretical and political positions. She made the journal a showcase of quality and diversity in intellectual property scholarship – it stands as one of many testaments to her work as an academic. What will stay with me even more, however, was her generosity and good humour with the contributors to the journal. My sincere condolences go to her family and close friends.
I first heard of Margaret Llewelyn when her book on plant varieties plus some articles appeared. The formidable person suggested by her interest in a highly technical area of law which until then had received little academic attention turned out to be an absolute delight in reality when we met while I was an external examiner at Sheffield. We kept in touch after that on a regular basis, especially when she became editor of the Intellectual Property Quarterly; and even more so when her husband, Rob Bradgate (another good friend from my Sheffield days on), was stricken with the Parkinson’s disease that eventually forced both of them to retire from academe and Rob’s sadly early death in 2014. Latterly we have communicated through the pages of Facebook. She was a joyful human being who had to contend with much adversity in her life, but who never lost the vitality that was the chief feature of her personality.
Professor Margaret Llewelyn has left an important legacy for intellectual property scholars around the world. Her work on plant variety rights informed and inspired me, and many others, to research and write in this area. Her work on European plant intellectual property law has been particularly important and influential, and perhaps most importantly, Professor Llewelyn was always willing to support and provide advice to other intellectual property law scholars including those new to the field.
I first met Professor Llewelyn when I was a PhD student giving a presentation at a conference over a decade ago. Despite her standing as a leading academic in the field, she was kind, approachable and open to sharing her ideas. After that meeting, I gained a great mentor and friend. Margaret’s generous encouragement and support was one of the main reasons I chose a career in academia. Her brilliant mind and sharp intellect, combined with her warm personality always encouraged me to seek her advice. She was an excellent listener and always gave sound advice on matters concerning both work and life. Her sudden passing was a complete shock. She was, and will always be an inspiration to me and she will be greatly missed.
Content reproduced from The IPKat as permitted under the Creative Commons Licence (UK).