Home > News > Recent cases

Rovi Solutions Corporation & Anor v Virgin Media Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 1559 (Pat)15 May 2014Members of Chambers recently appeared for both sides in one of the listed patent actions between Rovi and Virgin Media. Richard Meade QC and Henry Ward appeared for Rovi. James Mellor QC and Andrew Lykiardopoulos appeared for Virgin Media. The dispute concerned interactive television services (in particular the Virgin Media “Red Button” service). Rovi claimed […]
Swarovski-Optik KG v Leica Camera AG and Leica Camera Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 63715 May 2014Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC recently appeared in the Court of Appeal for Swarovski, responding to an appeal brought by Leica from the Judgment of Vos J [2013] EWHC 1227 (Pat). The first instance trial concerned a patent owned by Swarovski for the use of an additional strong negative lens in riflescopes to enable a wide field […]
Phil & Ted’s Most Excellent Buggy Co. v. TFK Trends for Kids GmbH [2014] EWCA Civ 46916 April 2014Andrew Lykiardopoulos acted for Phil & Ted’s in this appeal concerning a patent for folding baby buggies and whether Phil & Ted’s “Promenade” buggy infringed a valid patent. Phil & Ted’s succeeded before Birss HHJ and the patent was held to be invalid. TFK appealed. The Court of Appeal dismissed TFK’s appeal and upheld the […]
Hospira v Genentech [2014] EWHC 1094 (Pat)19 March 2014In this heavy biotech action Hospira sought to revoke three of Genentech’s patents relating to the blockbuster Herceptin monoclonal antibody product, as well as seeking a declaration of non-infringement. The patents related to issues of product purity and dosage regimens, with technical evidence being given by six experts, and particularly focussed on issues of novelty, […]
YouView Ltd v G & J Holdings GmbH (IPO) (O-113-14) (11 March 2014)11 March 2014Trade Mark Registry Opposition (consolidated proceedings). G & J Holdings Ltd opposed YouView Ltd’s three applications to register five trade marks consisting of or containing the words “My View” for various goods and services in Classes 9, 38 and 41. The Opponent opposed the registration of these marks under s. 5(2)(b) of the 1994 Act […]