Home > People > Barristers > Jennifer Dixon

Jennifer Dixon

CALL: 2017
Jennifer Dixon

Since joining 8 New Square as a tenant in October 2019, Jennifer has developed a broad intellectual property practice. Jennifer has particular experience in FRAND and SEP disputes but is also regularly instructed in relation to trade mark and copyright matters.

Jennifer has been involved in matters before the UKIPO, High Court, Court of Appeal and IPEC (including the IPEC Small Claims Track).

  • Experience

    Patents & SPCs

    • Bayer v Aspire & ors [2024] EWHC 711 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for Teva, alongside Justin Turner KC, in interim injunction proceedings relating to the drug rivaroxaban.
    • ThroughPuter v Microsoft (settled): instructed in patent proceedings relating to cloud computing technology. Led by James St.Ville KC in a number of procedural hearings relating to the same, including hearings relating to adequacy of disclosure by way of PPD.
    • Abbott v Dexcom [2024] EWHC 36 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for Abbott alongside Daniel Alexander KC, James Abrahams KC and Michael Conway in a patent trial relating to various aspects of continuous glucose monitoring technology.
    • Abbott v Dexcom [2023] EWHC 2591 (Ch): appeared as junior counsel for Abbott alongside Daniel Alexander KC and James Whyte in a patent trial relating to inserters for continuous glucose monitoring sensors.
    • Optis v Apple [2022] EWHC 561 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Tom Hinchliffe KC and James Whyte in a SEP action relating to code multiplexing of ACK/NACK and CQI signals. Jennifer also appeared, alongside Tom Hinchliffe KC, in the appeal of this judgment, in which Optis was the successful respondent – see [2023] EWCA Civ 758.
    • Kaotica v Studiospares (settled): drafted defence and counterclaim and appeared as sole counsel at the CMC in proceedings relating to accessories for studio microphones.
    • Optis v Apple [2021] EWHC 1739 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Tom Moody-Stuart KC and Tom Jones in a SEP action. Jennifer assisted with the patent aspects of the proceedings, which concerned polling on the radio link control layer.
    • Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd v Flexicare Medical Ltd [2020] EWHC 3282 (Pat): assisted with the preparation of expert evidence in patent proceedings relating to medical breathing tubes.
    • Evalve inc v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd [2020] EWHC 514 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Richard Meade KC, James Abrahams KC and Michael Conway in a patent action relating to transcatheter devices for treating mitral valve regurgitation.
    • Conversant v Huawei [2019] EWHC 1687 (Pat): Assisted Adrian Speck KC, Mark Chacksfield KC and Michael Conway in a trial relating to validity and essentiality of a telecoms patent.
    • Pfizer v Roche [2019] EWHC 1520 (Pat): Assisted Richard Meade KC and Thomas Jones with legal research on declaratory judgments.

     

    Trade marks & Brands

    • Jennifer regularly advises on trade mark and passing off matters. Recent examples include advising on issues of trade mark infringement and passing off in the fields of packaging, homeware, luxury cars, and fashion.
    • Bower Collective v Sugi (ongoing): Jennifer is instructed on behalf of the Defendant in proceedings for trade mark infringement and passing off.
    • Babek v Iceland (ongoing): Jennifer is instructed on behalf of the Claimant in ongoing trade mark infringement proceedings. In the course of proceedings, Jennifer has represented the Claimant in its successful response to an application to stay IPEC proceedings in favour of parallel UKIPO proceedings and represented the Claimant in its successful defence of an application for summary judgment on the Defendant’s validity claim – see [2025] EWHC 547 (IPEC).
    • Vizst (Opposition no. O/0533/24): appeared for the applicant in trade mark opposition proceedings concerning an application for the mark Vizst, opposed on the basis of the trade mark “Vizrt”.
    • King Professional (Opposition no. O/1017/24): represented the successful party in consolidated invalidity and opposition proceedings, which included consideration of bad faith allegations.
    • Wolf of Wilderness (Opposition no. O/366/21): represented the applicant in its successful application to register the mark “wolf of wilderness” in relation to various pet products.
    • GlaxoSmithKline v Sandoz: assisted Martin Howe KC, Iona Berkley and Ashton Chantrielle in a 12 day trial for passing off, relating to the get-up of inhaler devices and their packaging and in particular the use of the colour purple on inhalers.
    • Beauty Bay v Benefit [2019] EWHC 1150 (Ch): assisted Jessie Bowhill in a trade mark infringement and passing off trial relating to the names of beauty products.
    • O/294/19 Opposition No. 411806 By Easygroup Limited: assisted Ashton Chantrielle with preparation of skeleton arguments in a trade mark opposition hearing relating to the mark ezyVet.

    Copyright & Databases

    • Jennifer regularly advises on copyright matters and has settled pleadings relating to both copyright and database right infringement.
    • Inviso v OGC: assisted Martin Howe KC in settling particulars of claim in a software copyright dispute. Represented the Claimant in a successful application to add a defendant to the claim and in resisting an application for transfer from the High Court to the IPEC.
    • Martin v Kogan: During pupillage assisted Ashton Chantrielle and Simon Malynicz KC with preparation for an appeal to the Court of Appeal, on the issue of the extent of contribution required to establish joint ownership of copyright.

    Design Rights

    • Jennifer regularly advises on infringement and validity of registered and unregistered design rights
    • During pupillage drafted a Defence and Counterclaim relating to unregistered design rights in beauty products.
    • During pupillage drafted a Defence and Counterclaim relating to registered and unregistered design rights in baby products.

    FRAND & Competition Law

    • Nokia v Amazon (ongoing): appeared as junior counsel for Nokia, alongside Tom Hinchliffe KC, in a CMC in expedited RAND proceedings.
    • Optis v Apple [2022] EWCA Civ 1411: appeared as junior counsel for the Respondents alongside Isabel Jamal of 8 New Square and Sarah Ford KC and Emily MacKenzie of Brick Court in an appeal concerning the correct interpretation of clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of the High Court (in which proceedings Jennifer also appeared). The Court further held that, as a procedural issue, a FRAND injunction may be granted in circumstances where only an unqualified injunction has been claimed in the pleadings.
    • Optis v Apple [2021] EWHC 2564 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Sarah Ford KC and Isabel Jamal in proceedings concerning the correct interpretation of clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy. The case concerned the novel issue of whether an implementer that declines to commit to taking the Court’s FRAND licence should be entitled to benefit from a SEP owner’s undertaking to ETSI pursuant to clause 6.1. It was held that in such circumstances an implementer can be subject to a FRAND injunction.
    • Optis v Apple [2023] EWHC 1095 (Ch): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Adrian Speck KC, Tom Moody-Stuart KC, Sarah Ford KC, Isabel Jamal, Emily MacKenzie and Tom Jones in proceedings to determine FRAND terms of a licence to the Claimants’ SEP portfolio. Jennifer, unled, addressed confidentiality issues in a second consequentials hearing following trial – [2024] EWHC 197 (Ch).

    Procedural matters

    • Jennifer regularly represents clients in applications for default judgment.
    • Nasdaq v Finage Ltd: appeared for Nasdaq in a successful application for an unless order relating to unpaid costs.

    Jurisdiction & Remedies

    • Evalve Inc v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd [2020] EWHC 513 (Pat): appeared as junior counsel for the Claimants alongside Richard Meade KC, James Abrahams KC, and Michael Conway in a trial concerning the circumstances in which the Court will decline to grant an injunction in the public interest. The Court granted final injunctive relief, having rejected the Defendants’ public interest defence.
    • iTronics v Electronic Instruments: represented iTronics in an application for a Letter of Request under the Hague Convention.
    • Jennifer has also acted as an examiner at a deposition hearing conducted pursuant to a Letter of Request under the Hague Convention.
  • Education and Awards
    • LLB, University College London (2:1)
    • BPTC, BBP Law School Holborn (Very Competent)
  • Other information
    • Semi-finalist, Oxford International Intellectual Property Moot 2016
    • Jennifer is business fluent in German and speaks intermediate level Gujarati.

    Professional Memberships

    Inner Temple

    Hobbies & Interests

    Jennifer has a keen interest in history and often visits the British Museum, where she is a member. She enjoys travel and participating in quizzes, and is a cricket fan.

Contact Jennifer Dixon's clerks

Whilst barristers have a designated practice management team, all the clerks have the capacity and knowledge to assist in cases involving all counsel.

Email the clerks