Home > News > Recent cases

Recent cases

Resolution Chemicals v H. Lundbeck A/S [2013] EWHC 739 (Pat)15 May 2013Michael Tappin QC and  Mark Chacksfield  succeeded on four preliminary issues before Mr Justice Arnold in the High Court in Resolution Chemicals v H. Lundbeck A/S [2013] EWHC 739 (Pat). Of particular interest are the decisions concerning estoppel/abuse of process due to res judicata by reason of privity of interest, and the defendant’s application for […]
Swarovski-Optik KG v Leica Camera AG and Leica Camera Limited [2013] EWHC 1227 (Pat)10 May 2013Andrew Lykiardopoulos recently appeared in the High Court before Mr Justice Vos, acting for the successful patentee in Swarovski-Optik KG v Leica Camera AG and Leica Camera Limited [2013] EWHC 1227 (Pat). The case concerned riflescopes. The Judge found that Swarovski’s patent (covering an invention in the the optical design of riflescopes) was valid and […]
Phil & Ted’s Most Excellent Buggy Company -and- TFK Trends For Kids GmbH8 May 2013Andrew Lykiardopoulos recently acted for Phil & Ted’s Most Excellent Buggy Company in a patent dispute in the Patents County Court against TFK Trends for Kids. The dispute concerned Phil & Ted’s “Promenade” buggy. TFK said that the Promenade infringed their patent (which covered buggies which can convert between a seat and a carrycot). His […]
32Red v WHG8 May 2013Lindsay Lane and Tom Moody-Stuart recently appeared before Mr Justice Newey in 32Red v WHG, Lindsay Lane appearing with Henry Carr QC for WHG and Tom Moody-Stuart appearing with Michael Silverleaf QC for 32Red. The case concerned a damages inquiry following a successful Trade Mark infringement liability hearing in October 2010. By trial it was […]
Public Relations Consultants Association Ltd v The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd [2013] UKSC 1823 April 2013Andrew Lykiardopoulos recently appeared in the Supreme Court, led by Henry Carr QC in The Newspaper Licensing Agency Limited v. Meltwater & the PRCA [2013] UKSC 18. The case concerned whether viewing or reading a web page could amount to copyright infringement. In particular, the case concerned the scope of the temporary copying exception to […]
Merck Canada Inc v Sigma Pharmaceuticals PLC [2013] EWCA Civ 32618 April 2013Martin Howe QC and Isabel Jamal acted for the appellants in successfully persuading the Court of Appeal to make a preliminary reference on the interpretation of the so-called ‘Specific Mechanism’, which relates to the parallel importation of pharmaceuticals from Poland and other EU Accession States. The case was decided at first instance ([2012] EWPCC 18, […]
Lizzano Partitions (UK) Limited v Interiors Manufacturing Limited [2013] EWPCC 1211 April 2013Isabel Jamal recently appeared before His Honour Judge Birss QC in the Patents County Court in Lizzanno Partitions (UK) Limited v Interiors Manufacturing Limited [2013] EWPCC 12. She acted for the patentee who succeeded in defending an action for a declaration of non-infringement (in relation to which it brought a counterclaim for infringement) and a […]
Hospira UK Ltd v Novartis AG [2013] EWHC 516 (Pat)2 April 2013Michael Tappin QC recently acted for Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan), the second claimant in Hospira UK Ltd v Novartis AG [2013] EWHC 516 (Pat). This was a claim for revocation of two European patents relating to the intravenous administration of zoledronate for the treatment of osteoporosis, at intervals of at least six months. The […]
Fage UK Ltd -v- Chobani UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 630 (Ch)26 March 2013Daniel Alexander QC and John Baldwin QC recently appeared before Mr Justice Briggs in Fage UK Ltd v Chobani UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 630 (Ch), representing the Claimants and the Defendants, respectively. This case was an extended passing-off action concerning sales of thick and creamy yoghurt under the phrase “Greek yoghurt” in UK supermarkets. The […]
Schutz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd [2013] UKSC 1620 March 2013Richard Meade QC and Lindsay Lane recently appeared in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom for the respondent in Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd [2013] UKSC 16. This important decision clarifies the meaning of the word “make” for the purpose of patent infringement under section 60(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1977, and […]