Recent cases

Accord Healthcare v Research Corporation Technologies [2017] EWHC 2711 (Ch)16 November 2017This action related to a patent for lacosamide; an anti-epileptic drug. Accord Healthcare Limited sought to invalidate the SPC protecting lacosamide, on grounds that the patent was invalid.
Jake Fior v The Walt Disney Company Limited [2017] EWHC 2933 (IPEC)13 November 2017In a trade mark dispute about ‘ALICE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS’ Henry Ward for the Defendants Disney successfully applied to strike out the Claimant’s pleading that relied on without prejudice correspondence. The Judge held that the exceptions to the without prejudice rule in Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Limited [2010] UKSC 44 […]
Technomed v Bluecrest Health Screening [2017] EWHC 2142 (Ch)24 August 2017Jonathan Hill successfully represented the claimants (“Technomed”) in this claim for infringement of sui generis database right and various copyrights by the defendants (“Bluecrest” and “Express”). Bluecrest had entered a contract with Technomed for the provision of heart screening services, using Technomed’s Electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis and reporting system (known as the ECG Cloud). This was […]
Premier League Commission8 August 2017A number of members of chambers regularly sit as arbitrators. Decisions of arbitral panels are rarely made public but an exception was the recent decision of a Commission, established pursuant to the rules of the Premier League, which has attracted interest among football clubs and fans concerning the rules requiring clubs to offer concessionary prices […]
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 […]