Recent cases

Actavis -and- Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 4812 July 2017Daniel Alexander QC, Richard Meade QC and Isabel Jamal appeared for the Claimant/Respondent, Actavis, in this landmark case in which the Supreme Court changed the way in which UK courts consider patent infringement by ‘equivalents’. The Supreme Court, allowing the appeal and finding that Actavis’s product both directly and indirectly infringed, substantially re-cast the English […]
Astex Therapeutics Ltd -v- Astrazeneca Ab [2017] EWHC 1442 (Ch)21 June 2017James Mellor QC and James Whyte appeared for the Defendant, AstraZeneca, in a case concerning payments under a collaboration agreement between AstraZeneca and the Claimant, Astex. The terms of the agreement provided that Astex were entitled to milestone payments in certain circumstances, and to royalties from sales of any products containing a “collaboration compound”. Astex […]
Federation International De L’automobile v Gator Sports Ltd16 June 2017Jonathan Hill successfully represented the Claimant (FIA), the sporting body in charge of motor sport, in a claim in the Chancery Division for trade mark infringement and passing off in relation to articles of clothing sold by the Defendant companies after expiry of an official merchandise license relating to the World Rally Championship (WRC). Shortly […]
Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd [2017] EWHC 1304 (Pat)8 June 2017Adrian Speck QC, Isabel Jamal and Thomas Jones appeared for the claimant, Unwired Planet, and Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC appeared for the defendant, Huawei, in this hearing which considered remedies, in particular the appropriate form of a “FRAND injunction”, following the Court’s earlier ruling ([2017] EWHC 711 (Pat)) on the terms of a FRAND licence. Among […]
Synthon v Teva [2017] EWCA Civ 14822 May 2017Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC represented the Appellant, Synthon, in its appeal concerning Teva’s patent for glatiramer acetate (marketed as “Copaxone”). The Patent related to a method of making glatiramer acetate with limited levels bromine and free metal impurities. Synthon had challenged the validity of the patent on grounds of lack of novelty, obviousness and insufficiency. At […]
Varian Medical Systems International AG v Elekta [2017] EWHC 712 (Pat)18 May 2017James Abrahams QC and James Whyte successfully represented the Defendants (Elekta) in Varian’s claim for infringement of its patent for a combined MRI and radiotherapy device. Elekta denied that its combined MRI and radiotherapy machine infringed the Patent, and further claimed that the Patent was invalid for insufficiency, obviousness and added matter. The judge held […]
Teva UK Ltd v Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp [2017] EWHC 539 (Pat)17 May 2017Charlotte May QC and Lindsay Lane represented the first claimant (“Teva”) in its successful challenge of the defendant’s (“Merck”) supplementary protection certificate (SPC) for an anti-viral drug marketed as Atripla.   The SPC covered a combination of the active ingredient efavirenz together with emtricitabine and tenofovir. The Court agreed with Teva’s case that the SPC […]
Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd v Sandoz Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 33510 May 2017This appeal is in a large scale action for Trade Mark infringement and passing off brought by Glaxo against Sandoz in relation to respiratory inhalers. The UK action forms part of a series of international disputes concerning these pharmaceutical products. Glaxo owns an EU colour per se trade mark which is visually represented by a […]
Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat)4 May 2017Adrian Speck QC, Isabel Jamal and Tom Jones appeared for the Claimant, Unwired Planet, and Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC appeared for the Defendant, Huawei, in a landmark action concerning the nature of a patent holder’s obligations to license Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) on Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms.   In a much-anticipated judgment, Birss J […]
Glaxo Wellcome UK Limited v Sandoz Limited [2017] EWCA Civ 2276 April 2017Martin Howe QC and Iona Berkeley represented the Respondents, “Sandoz”, in Glaxo’s Appeal against the decision of HHJ Hacon refusing permission to join two additional defendants to its claim for passing off. Glaxo alleged passing off on the basis that Sandoz had marketed asthma inhalers similar to Glaxo’s ‘Seratide’ inhalers in the UK. Glaxo had […]