News

Glencairn IP Holdings Ltd and another v Dartington Crystal [2018] EWHC 769 (Pat)16 March 2018James Abrahams QC appeared for the Claimants in this application for an interim injunction. The Claimants are the proprietor/ exclusive licensee of a registered design for a drinking glass and applied for an interim injunction against the Defendant, a manufacturer of glass wear. The Defendant had applied to revoke the registered design and for a […]
Frank Industries v Nike [2018] EWCA Civ 49713 March 2018James Abrahams QC appeared for Nike in this appeal against an interim injunction granted by His Honour Judge Hacon. The substantive action relates to Nike’s “Nothing beats a Londoner” campaign, during the course of which Nike used the sign ‘LDNR’, for which the Claimant has registered UK and EU trade marks. HH Judge Hacon granted an […]
Frank Industries v Nike [2018] EWCA Civ 497.13 March 2018  James Abrahams QC appeared for Nike in this appeal against an interim injunction granted by His Honour Judge Hacon. The substantive action relates to Nike’s “Nothing beats a Londoner” campaign, during the course of which Nike used the sign ‘LDNR’, for which the Claimant has registered UK and EU trade marks. HH Judge Hacon […]
8 New Square awarded Bar Council Certificate of Recognition for its Wellbeing work6 March 20188 New Square is absolutely delighted to have been awarded the Bar Council Certificate of Recognition for its wellbeing work – an award which reflects the welcome growth in the recognition of the importance of wellbeing to the creation of a healthy, diverse and supportive working environments in chambers and across the Bar generally
Actavis v ICOS & Eli Lilly [2017] EWHC 2880 (Pat)15 February 2018Adrian Speck QC and Tom Jones appeared for Actavis, Teva and Mylan in this application by Lilly and Icos (“Lilly”) for an interim injunction to prevent the launch of generic 2.5 and 5mg tadalafil pending a petition by Lilly to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal. At first instance, Lilly’s patent for a dosing regime concerning the […]
Actavis and Ors v ICOS & Eli Lilly [2017] EWHC 2880 (Pat)15 February 2018Adrian Speck QC and Tom Jones appeared for Actavis, Teva and Mylan in this application by Lilly and Icos (“Lilly”) for an interim injunction to prevent the launch of generic 2.5 and 5mg tadalafil pending a petition by Lilly to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal. At first instance, Lilly’s patent for a dosing […]
Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC represents Lucozade Ribena Suntory Ltd in first ever Community Plant Variety Office application8 February 2018In January 2018, Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC acted for the respondent in the first compulsory license application to be heard by the Community Plant Variety Office. The application made by Pixley Berries (Juice) Limited related to the CPVR for the blackcurrant variety “Ben Starav” of the species Ribes nigrum L. In accordance with Article 38(1) of […]
Cantel Medical (UK) v ARC Medical Design [2018] EWHC 345 (Pat)26 January 2018Daniel Alexander QC appeared with Henry Ward for the Defendant, Arc Medical. Cantel sued Arc for a declaration of non- infringement and/ or revocation of Arc’s patents for endoscope caps which increase the detection of polyps/ adenomas. Arc applied to amend its patent and counterclaimed for infringement of its Community Registered and UK unregistered design rights. His Honour […]
Cantel Medical (UK) Limited v ARC Medical Design Limited [2018] EWHC 345 (Pat)26 January 2018Daniel Alexander QC appeared with Henry Ward for the Defendant, Arc Medical. Cantel sued Arc for a declaration of non- infringement and/ or revocation of Arc’s patents for endoscope caps which increase the detection of polyps/ adenomas. Arc applied to amend its patent and counterclaimed for infringement of its Community Registered and UK unregistered design […]
Hospira v Cubist Pharmaceuticals [2018] EWCA Civ 1218 January 2018Richard Meade QC and Isabel Jamal appeared for the Respondent, Hospira, in this appeal against the revocation of Cubist’s patent at first instance. The patent concerned a method of purification for the antibiotic daptomycin. The Judge had found that the patent was obvious in light of the teaching of a piece of prior art which […]