INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY • SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT • COMPETITION
PATENTS
8 New Square has been involved in patent litigation for over 100 years. Members of 8 New Square have acted in most of the heavyweight patent litigation in the UK and have often been involved in lead cases with implications for parallel cases in other jurisdictions. Barristers at 8 New Square have a very broad range of experience over many areas of technology. These are some of the areas in which we have been active in recent years.
Pharmaceuticals and chemicals
In pharmaceuticals, members of chambers have recently acted in numerous patent cases involving APIs, formulations and dosage forms and pharmaceutical processes.
Recent cases have included patents relating to the following:
Members of chambers also have experience of cases concerning Supplementary Protection Certificates in the Patent Office and High Court and have been involved in leading cases in the European Court of Justice; cases includeYissum, Takeda, BASF, Merck and Wellcome.
Barristers at 8 New Square are regularly involved in pharmaceutical cases involving co-ordination of litigation in several jurisdictions.
8 New Square has a breadth of experience in chemical patent litigation outside the field of pharmaceuticals including process patents for sweeteners (Daesang v. Ajinomoto) and patents relating to polymeric dispersants (ICI v. Montedison).
Members of chambers also have experience in cases involving diagnostic kits and other medical devices, e.g. Unilever v. Chefaro and Dendron v. Univ. of California.
Biotechnology
8 New Square has vast experience in biotechnology patent litigation. This goes back 25 years to the earliest biotechnology patent litigation in which a team from chambers acted in the Genentech tPA case.
Members of chambers have acted in nearly all of the significant cases in this field in recent years in the High Court, Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, including:
Recently members of chambers have been instructed in the Roche v. Chiron litigation (Herceptin®, Fuzeon®) and the Yeda v. RPR & ImClone entitlement dispute (Erbitux®).
8 New Square has the largest group of barristers with substantial experience of biotechnology litigation in the United Kingdom and has been involved in both of the House of Lords appeals in this area. Members of chambers are able to bring a deep understanding of the technology, law and the industry to the work.
Oil and gas
In the oil and gas industry, members of chambers have recently been involved in infringement and validity cases including:
Chambers has also been involved in two major arbitrations concerning patent licences and a substantial portfolio of US and UK patents. Cases have also included an entitlement dispute concerning oil detection methods (Statoil v. University of Southampton).
Electronics and telecommunications
Barristers at 8 New Square have considerable experience in electronics and telecommunications work including recently:
Engineering
Engineering patent litigation is a further area of speciality. Recent cases have included:
Consumer products
8 New Square has extensive experience of acting in consumer products patent cases including recent cases involving:
Work has included acting in lead cases in respect of some of the largest brands in Europe.
Entitlement and patent licence disputes
There has been a spate of entitlement disputes over recent years and members of chambers have been involved in many of them: Markem v. Zipher, IDA v. Univ. of Southampton, Stanelco v. Bioprogress, Collag v. Merck, Yeda v. RPR & ImClone.
Members of chambers frequently act in disputes concerning rights to patents, including Fraser v. Oystertec.
Damages and other remedies
As to damages for patent infringement, a team from chambers recently secured one of the highest awards of damages for infringement of a patent (conservatory roofs - Ultraframe v. Eurocell). A member of chambers acted in a case involving one of the largest recent damages settlements (Dyson v. Hoover). In that case the successful claimant was also held to be entitled to an injunction beyond expiry of the patent.
Multi-jurisdictional litigation
Patent litigation in the UK is often only part of a wider dispute involving litigation in the USA and/or other European jurisdictions. Members of chambers are used to working as part of a team of lawyers in different jurisdictions and are sensitive to the need to co-ordinate and harmonise approaches in the various countries where litigation is being or may be conducted.
Barristers from 8 New Square have been involved in all the significant cases which have addressed the issues arising out of trans-national European patent litigation - Coin Controls v. Suzo, Fort Dodge v. Akzo, GAT v. LUK and Roche Nederland v. Primus.
European Patent Office
Several members of chambers have extensive experience of the European Patent Office, particularly at the boards of appeal and have recently acted in cases involving stents, washing processes, pharmaceuticals and a wide range of biotech inventions including GM crop processes, GM animals and humanised antibodies.
Members of chambers also have experience in seeking and resisting stays of UK proceedings pending the outcome of EPO oppositions - see e.g. Beloit v. Valmet, GEC v. Enercon, Unisantis v. X-Ray Optics, Hunt v. Don & Low, Rambus v. Hyundai and Ivax v. AstraZeneca.
UK Patent Office - entitlement and other disputes
Barristers also regularly appear in the UK Patent Office in disputes over validity and entitlement. Recent cases have included inventions relating to pharmaceutical products, the oil industry, antibody therapy and pest control. They include: IDA v. Univ of Southampton, Statoil v. Univ. of Southampton.
Chambers also has extensive experience in administrative law cases concerning procedure before the Patent Office and the powers of the Comptroller (e.g. Woolard, Ash & Lacy, Altecnic, Penife).