Home > News > Recent cases

Recent cases

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 […]
Harman International Industries Limited v Martin Audio Limited (O-108-14) (7 March 2014)7 March 2014Trade Mark Registry Invalidity Applications (consolidated proceedings). Harman International Industries Ltd applied to invalidate two UK trade Marks ‘OMNILIVE’ and ‘OmniLine’ both registered in respect of various goods in Class 9. Harman relied on objections under Sections 5(2)(b) and 5 (3) of the 1994 Act on the basis of its earlier Community Trade Mark ‘OMNIDRIVE’ […]
Ian Shanks v (1) Unilever Plc (2) Unilever NV (3) Unilever UK Central Resources Ltd O/259/137 February 2014The Intellectual Property Office has made public its substantive decision dismissing Professor Shanks’ long-running claim that patents resulting from an invention he made for his former employer Unilever had proved to be of “outstanding benefit” to Unilever and that he was therefore entitled to inventor’s compensation under s.40 Patents Act 1977. Daniel Alexander QC and […]
D. Jacobsen & Sons v Crocs Inc [2014] EWHC 987 (Ch)30 January 2014This was an interesting application by the defendant pursuant to Art 91 of the Community Designs Regulation for a stay of the proceedings pending an ongoing invalidity action in OHIM. The claim was one in threats relating to letters written in 2005, which had been subject to a previous voluntary stay pending different, earlier OHIM […]
AstraZeneca AB & Anor v KRKA, DD Novo Mesto & Anor [2014] EWHC 84 (Pat)24 January 2014Members of Chambers recently appeared for both sides in one of the few damages inquiries on a cross-undertaking in patent litigation to have been taken through to judgment. Daniel Alexander QC appeared for AstraZeneca (“AZ”) and Andrew Lykiardopoulos (led by Bernard Livesey QC) appeared for KRKA d.d. Novo Mesto and Consilient Health Limited. AZ had […]
Nintendo Co Ltd v PC Box SRL Case C-355/1223 January 2014Martin Howe QC appeared for Nintendo at the European Court on this reference from the Court of Milan (Intellectual Property Division). Lindsay Lane was Junior in the case. This was an action brought by Nintendo the well known video games company against a supplier of devices which allowed users of Nintendo consoles to by-pass the […]
Smith & Nephew PLC v Convatec Technologies Inc [2013] EWHC 3955 (Pat)17 January 2014James Mellor QC and Charlotte May recently appeared for the Claimant and Third Parties (together ‘Smith & Nephew’) in patent proceedings regarding a European patent owned by Convatec. Convatec’s patent concerns a method of silverisation of gel-forming fibres used in wound dressings, using a sodium chloride reagent present at a concentration between 1% and 25% […]
Eugen Seitz AG v. KHS Corpoplast GMBH & Norgren AG [2014] EWHC 14 (Ch)15 January 2014Andrew Lykiardopoulos acted for the patentees (KHS Corpoplast and Norgren) defending this action for patent revocation and a declaration of non-infringement brought by Seitz. The patent concerned plastic pistons for blow moulding machines used in the bottling industry. Following a 7 day trial and a subsequent attempt by Seitz to re-open the trial, Mr Justice […]