8 NEW SQUARE

020 7405 4321

Recent ActivityRecent Cases

Daniel Alexander QC

 


Year of call: 1988
Year of silk: 2003

VIEW PDF VERSION

With over 20 years’ experience of litigation and advice in intellectual property cases, Daniel's practice covers all areas of intellectual property including IT and media/entertainment cases.

Work includes international and EU-cases, including multi-jurisdictional IP issues, private international law, and arbitration/mediation of IP and media disputes.

Patent work includes most areas of technology. Cases have involved medical and plant biotechnology (including SPCs), pharmaceuticals, chemical process design, telecommunications and mobile phones, medical and analytic equipment, electronics, petroleum engineering apparatus, data transmission and systems design, hydraulic equipment, consumer and household products. Practice includes EPO, UK Patent Office and CJEU cases.

Media/copyright work includes rights licensing, copyright infringement and internet related cases in all areas, including music, visual arts, print and electronic media. Work includes cases for most major broadcasters.

Prominent trade mark work includes the leading ECJ cases Canon, BMW/Deenik Nichols, Gerolsteiner, Doublemint, Philips/Remington, Davidoff/Levis and Celltech.

IT work covers wide range, including rights-related and contract disputes and arbitration of IT disputes.

 

Patents

Gemstar* v Virgin (2011)

Multiple TV guide patents.

Georgetown University* and others v. Comptroller (2011)

ECJ reference on Article 3(b) of SPC Regulation in biotech case concerning combination vaccines.

Shanks v Unilever* (2010-11)

Assessment of employee compensation where patent transferred in a corporate group.

Motorola* v RIM (2010)

Multiple patents relating to mobile telephony.

IPCom* v Nokia (2009-2011)

Synchronisation and RACH access in mobile telephony.

GSK* v Abbott (2007-9)

Royalties under patent licence relating to several biotech patents.

Cranway v. Playtech* (2009)

Internet gaming.

Ancon* v. ACS (2009)

Building materials.

Wake Forest/KCI* v. Smith & Nephew/Molnlycke (2009)

Wound dressings.

Symbian* v. Comptroller (2008)

Patentability of computer implemented inventions.

GSK* v Genentech (2007-8)

Immunotheraphy for RA. Leading case on when a stay should be granted pending EPO proceedings.

Actavis v. Janssen* (2008)

Beta-blockers involving chiral chemistry and law on novelty.

Novartis* v. Dexcel (2008)

Cyclosporine formulation.

Arrow* v Merck (2007)

Alendronate. Leading case on negative declarations.

DuPont* v Smurfitt (2007)

Drinks packaging.

Nichia v Argos* (2007)

Blue LEDs. Leading case on approach to disclosure.

Hoffman la Roche* v Chiron (2006)

Biotech patents concerning Fuzeon® HIV therapy and Herceptin® cancer therapy.

Samsung v Ericsson* (2006-7)

Multiple patents for aspects of mobile telephony.

Novartis* v Ivax (2006-7)

Cyclosporin formulation (Neoral®)

Aerotel v Telco* (2006)

Exclusions from patentability.

Mayne* v Teva (2004-2005)

Paclitaxel formulation.

Yeda v Imclone/Rhone Poulenc Rorer* (2005-2007)

Entitlement dispute concerning Erbitux.

Cambridge Antibody Technology* v Abbott (2005)

Licence dispute concerning Humira®.

ITG* v Algernon (2005).

Electronic tagging equipment.

Statoil v University of Southampton* (2005)

Sub-sea electronic mapping patent.

Celltech* v Medimmune (2002-4)

Humanised monoclonal antibodies

Pharmacia/Columbia University* v Par (2003)

Letters of request relating to latanoptrost.

Wyeth v Alpharma* (2003)

Controlled release minocycline.

Lunkbeck*  v Lagap (2003)

Citalopram process.

IDA v University of Southampton* (2003-6)

Entitlement dispute concerning pest control.

Artemi v CPA* (2003-4)

Patent renewal agent’s negligence concerning claims of US patent.

Alcatel* v Marconi (2002)

Digital transmission equipment (SDH cross-connects).

Woolard’s application (2002)

Effect of double patenting provisions.

R v. Comptroller-General* ex p Ash & Lacy (2002)

Powers of Comptroller.

SKB v Alpharma* (2002)

Seroxat® polymorph.

Elida Faberge* v Colgate Palmolive (2001)

Toothbrush design.

Trespaphan v Polinas* (2000-2001)

Packaging films.

SKF* v NSK (2001)

Ball bearings.

Baker Hughes* v Haliburton (2002)

Oilfield apparatus.

DITF v Fibreguide (2001)

Yarn making equipment.

Hewlett Packard* v Waters (2001-2)

HPLC pumping apparatus.

Novartis v Sangstat* (2000)

Blood products.

Procter & Gamble v Lever Bros* (1999-2000).

Washing products.

Prendergast’s Applications (2000)

Requirements for a valid “Swiss-style” claim.

Horne v Reliance* (1999)

Thermostatic mixer valves.

Carless* v Sofitech (1999)

Entitlement claim relating to drilling fluid formulation.

Nutrinova v FDL* (1998)

Artificial sweetener.

Bayer v Octapharma* (1999)

Stabilised immunoglobulins.

Connaught Laboratories'* Patent (1999)

B. Pertussis vaccine.

Samsonite v Carlton* (1997)

Luggage locking.

Luk Lamellan (1997)

Patent Office practice.

Electrolux v Black & Decker* (1996)

Lawn mower design.

Peaudouce v Kimberly Clark* (1996)

Diapers.

Organon v Hoffmann La Roche* (1995)

PCR (polymerase chain reaction) patent.

Richardson Vicks'* Patent (1997)

Combination cold therapies - revocation/amendment.

Petra Fischer’s Application (1997)

Motor car engines.

Chiron* v Organon and Murex (1992-96)

HCV genetic engineering patent.

Westland* v Kern (1994)

Helicopter avionics.

ICI v Montedison* (1995)

Silicate reinforced polymers.

Unilever v Chefaro* (1994-95)

HCG immunoassay.

Quantel* v Shima Seiki (1990)

Video electronics.

(* denotes clients)

Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs)

Yissum’s* SPC Appln (2005-2007)

Second medical use SPC.

Takeda’s* Patents (2004)

Combination products.

BASF v Bureau voor Industriele Eigendom (2001)

Rights to obtain supplementary protection certificates. Acted for UK Government.

Merck v Italian Patent Office (1999)

ECJ case concerning the extent to which recitals may be used to interpret EC supplementary protection legislation. Acted for UK Government.

Wellcome v Nycomed (1999)

ECJ case concerning the meaning of “product” in the supplementary protection certificate regulation. Acted for UK Government.

(* indicates client)

EPO Cases

Gemstar* (2010)

Two cases relating to TV Guides.

Astra Zeneca (2005)

Asthma therapy.

British Telecommunications (2003)

Method for allocating resources.

Advanced Cardiovascular Systems’* (2003)

Stents.

Du Pont De Nemours (2003)

Grains with improved oil composition.

Edinburgh University (2002)

Stem cells.

Unilever*  (2001)

Chemical engineering process.

Chiron (1999)

HCV virus.

Unilever* (2000)

Washing process.

Harvard University (1995-2004)

Genetic modification of animals (“oncomouse”).

Plant Genetic Systems (1992-95)

Genetically modified plants.

Gore* (1994)

Medical fabric patent.

(* indicates client)

UK and ECJ, CFI Trade Marks and Passing Off

Donvand* v Altun (2010)

Trade marks and passing off for online travel business.

Bambino Mio* (2009)

Trade mark infringement in diaper marks.

McKinlay* (2009)

General Court.

Target Brands* v Music Choice (2006-7)

TM opposition.

Easy.Com TMs (2006)

Opposition relating to “easy” marks.

Apple Corps* v Apple Computer (2006)

High Court claim relating to TM delimitation agreement.

Celltech* TM (2005)

A leading ECJ case on distinctiveness of composite marks.

Incos*  v L’Oreal (2004-5)

Passing off and TM action relating to fragrances.

Bongrain’s TM application (2004)

Registrability of shape mark.

Wagg* v Nestle Purina (2004)

Alleged passing off in respect of pet food products.

OHIM v Wrigley (2004)

ECJ case concerning registration of “Doublemint” as a trade mark. Acted for the UK Government in the ECJ.

Gerolsteiner TM (2004)

ECJ case concerning scope of descriptiveness defence. Acted for UK Government.

Shield TM (2004)

ECJ case concerning registrability of sound trade marks. Acted for UK Government.

Nichols’ TM application (2003)

ECJ case concerning requirement of distinctiveness. Acted for Registrar.

Travelex* v European Commission (2003)

Claim before the Court of First Instance for non-contractual damages in respect of adoption of Euro symbol.

Philips v Remington (2003)

ECJ case on registrability and infringement of shape marks. Acted for the UK Government.

Linde/Winward/Rado TMs [2003] RPC 803

ECJ case relating to registration of shape marks. Acted for UK Government.

Sieckmann v DPA [2003] RPC 685

ECJ case on the registration of smell marks and the meaning of capable of being represented graphically. Acted for UK Government.

Tommy Hilfiger v Branded Stocks* (2001-2)

Claim concerning import of allegedly counterfeit clothing the subject of a settlement agreement.

Altecnic v Reliance (2002)

CA case concerning interpretation of trade mark specification in the light of the identified class. Acted for the Registrar.

Ghazillian TM (2002)

Case concerning the morality/public policy provisions of the Trade Marks Act.

Levis v Tesco* (2002)

Leading case on parallel imports from outside the EC. Acted for Levis and Costco.

Spectron v GFI* (2000)

Alleged passing off by get up of dealing screens.

Yakult (2001)

Shape of container.

LTJ Diffussion v Verbautdet (2001)

ECJ case concerning the meaning of “identical” marks in the Trade Marks Directive. Acted for the UK Government.

Merz & Krell v DPA (2000)

ECJ case concerning the registration of laudatory terms under the Trade Marks Directive. Acted for the UK Government.

Gillette v Jayish* (1999)

Trade mark, passing of and breach of contract claim concerning allegedly unlawful parallel import of consumer products by distributor.

Proctor & Gamble's Trade Marks (1999)

The leading UK CA case on the registrability of shape/colour trade marks. Acted for the Registrar.

Linea v House of Fraser* (1999)

Action in passing off in respect of use of “LINEA” brand for clothing.

Canon v MGM (1999)

The leading ECJ case concerning the interpretation of the Trade Marks Directive on the requirement of distinctiveness in case concerning registrability of trade marks. Acting for UK.

Wild Child (1998)

Scope of section 5(4) of Trade Marks Act.

Upjohn v Paranova (1998)

ECJ case on the principles governing the rights to use a modified mark in the course of parallel importing. Acted for the UK.

BMW v Deenik (1998)

Leading ECJ case concerning the ability of a trader to use a mark to indicate suitability of goods or service. Acting for the UK

Taylor Made* v Rata & Rata (1996)

Anton Piller order/contempt of court in trade mark case concerning golf clubs.

Harrods* v Harrods (Buenos Aires) (1996)

Major litigation seeking to restrain use by defendants of Harrods mark on the basis of fiduciary relationship and breach of contract causes of action.

IBM v Phoenix* (1992-94)

Trade mark infringement action involving Article 86/EC counterclaim and a reported aspect on the extent to which use could be made of wrongly disclosed discovery documents.

Harrods* v Harrodian School (1994-96)

Passing off action which became leading authority in the Court of Appeal on the requirements for a successful passing off action.*

(* indicates client)

Copyright, Designs and Media and Entertainment

AETN v Channel 4* (2006)

Passing off case concerning use of programme title for alleged TV format.

Estate of Francis Bacon*  v Artprints (2006)

Copyright case relating to works by Francis Bacon.

Apple Corps* v Apple Computer (2006)

Claim by the Beatles’ company in claim against Apple Computer in respect of breach of trade mark delimitation agreement.

Landor & Hawa* v Azure (2006)

CA design right case concerning s.213 CDPA and interpretation of “method or principle of construction”.

Clearsprings*  v Businesslinx (2005)

Implied terms in copyright licence.

IPC* v Mirror (2005)

Fair use defence to copyright infringement and the law on comparative advertising.

PPL v Attorney General/DTI*  (2003-2007)

Claim for Francovich/Factortame damages against the UK Government in respect of implementation of the EU Rental Directive.

Commission v UK* (2002-5)

Acting for UK in infraction proceedings before the ECJ brought by the Commission in respect of s.72 of the Copyright Designs and Patent Act.

British Horseracing Board v Cantor Index* (2002-3)

Database right claim relating to horse racing information raising issues of UK and EU competition law.

Spiralstem v Superframe & M&S*  (2002-2006)

Design right in display equipment. Inquiry as to damages.

Ellerman v Ritz* (2001-2)

Litigation concerning rights to use trade marks on the internet, raising issue of where use of a trade mark takes place on the internet. Settled following mediation.

Avenco* v Cellnet (2001-2)

Dispute concerning copyright in guides to mobile telecommunication services.

MRI* v Dorling Kindersley (2001)

Litigation concerning supply of surplus stock of Star Wars books.

Stafford Engineering* v Wood [2000] RPC 797

Application for licence of right in respect of stage equipment designs.

EGEDA v HOASA (2000)

ECJ case concerning the broadcasting and cable retransmission rights directive deciding the meaning of communication to the public and reception by the public. Acted for the UK Government.

Electrolux v Dyson* [1999] ETMR 903

Comparative advertising case with cross claims for misleading advertising - both upheld under the trade marks act but not as malicious falsehood.

Times Newspapers v MGN*  (1999)

Copyright and confidential information case relating to the Thatcher Diaries, raising numerous points, including public interest in disclosure.

Hello! v Northern & Shell* (1999)

Comparative advertising litigation between two leading magazine companies. Case settled before trial.

Storway* v BHS (1998)

Copyright and design right in packaging for clothing.

CondeNast*  v MGN [1998] FSR 427

Copyright infringement in photographs.

Iomega v Nomai* (1998)

Action for infringement of registered trade mark and malicious falsehood in respect of claims of compatibility with "ZIP" drives. Case settled mid-trial.

(* indicates client)

Forenigen AF Dansk Videogramdistributorer v Laserdisken (1998)

ECJ case concerning the scope of rental rights in videos. Acted for the UK Government.

BSkyB*  v PRS [1998] RPC 467

One of the leading Copyright Tribunal references establishing principles for the payment of royalties to a collecting society by a large satellite broadcasting service.

Addison* v Goldbrand (1997)

Action by a design agency for trade mark infringement based on s.10(3) of the TMA in respect of advertising of Goldfish credit card. Action settled just before trial.

EBN/Flextech* (1997)

Action concerning of satellite distribution of TV channels. Acted for claimant in seeking injunction to require continued broadcast.

Morris Jackson* v Fryetts Fabrics (1996)

Copyright infringement claim in respect of fabric designs.

Harrison* v Lingasong (1996)

Action concerning performers' rights in the Beatles' Star Club recordings.

Buckler* v Weller (1996)

Account between former partners in the group "The Jam". Case settled mid-trial.

Banks v CBS* (1995)

Copyright infringement action concerning UB40 song lyrics. Acting for UB40.

MTVE* v BMG (1994-95)

Article 85/86EC claim by broadcaster against collecting society in respect of rights relating to music videos. Case settled after several interlocutory applications.

Apple* v Cooper (1992)

Action concerning copyright in photographs. Acting for Beatles’ company.

Apple Corps*  v Apple Computer (1990-91)

Breach of trade mark delimitation agreement involving points on conflict of laws, Article 85/EC and foreign competition law. Acting for Beatles’ company.

(* indicates client)

EU, Private International Law and Competition Law

 MPEG LA v Harvard* (2009)

Patel pool agreement raising issues on FRAND royalties and approach to determining claim.

GAT v Luk (2004-6)

ECJ case concerning jurisdiction under Article 16(4) of the Brussels Convention.

Celltech* v Medimmune (2004)

Impact of an exclusive jurisdiction clause on forum non conveniens arguments.

Apple Corps* v Apple Computer (2004)

Rome Convention on choice of law in an intellectual property agreement.

British Horseracing Board v Cantor Index* (2003)

Database right claim relating to horse racing information raising issues of UK and EU competition law.

Microsoft* v BDL (1998)

Article 86 allegations of predatory pricing and trade marks/copyright.

Modus Vivendi v British Products Sanmex* (1996)

Brussels Convention - jurisdiction dispute in passing off action.

Portman v MAFF (1994)

Judicial review based on EC directive concerning agrochemicals.

Chiron v Organon Murex* (1992-4)

Competition and private international law aspects of patent claim.

Blenheim v Mack Brooks* (1993)

Trade mark infringement - Brussels Convention

Fyffes* v Chiquita (1991-92)

Trade mark agreement alleged to be in contravention of Articles 85 and 86/EC and in restraint of trade.

(* indicates client)

Confidential Information

BUAV* v Home Office (2008)

Appeal from Information Tribunal concerning information relating to animal experiments.

Proceedings before Special Commissioners of income tax (2006)

Concerning claims to confidential information relating to formulae in context of CGT valuation.

Oliver v Arbuthnot Latham* (2001-2)

Acting for merchant bank defending claim for breach of confidence in proposals for a property development. Case settled before trial.

Surface Technology v Young*  (2002)

Case concerning the transmission of rights of privilege and confidence in a liquidation. Acted for the defendant to proceedings on an application to determine where rights lay.

Optimum Solutions v Yorkshire Electricity/Eastern Electricity* (2001-2).

Breach of confidence in electricity trading systems.

Overseal* v Phytone (1997)

Action concerning confidential information in food additives.

(* indicates client)

Arbitrations and Contractual Disputes

LCIA Arbitration concerning biotechnology agreement (2007-2009)

Acted as counsel for one the parties.

ICC Arbitration concerning biotechnology agreement (2007)

Appointed as member of arbitral tribunal but case settled at an early stage.

ICC Arbitration concerning computer contract (2005)

Member of arbitral tribunal. Case settled after preliminary hearing.

 ICC Arbitration in Brussels concerning confidential formulations (2004-5)

Claim by US company against Belgian company and others. Acted as counsel for US company.

ICC Arbitration in Amsterdam concerning movie channel (2003-4)

Member of arbitral tribunal. Claim by UK company against Dutch company.

ICC Arbitration in London concerning petroleum industry joint venture (2003-2004)

Acted as counsel for oil services company. Claim between members of large multinational groups.

US Mediation-Arbitration concerning petroleum industry patents (2004)

Acting as expert witness on UK patent law in claims and cross-claims between US-based companies.

UK Industry-wide arbitration in 2000-2001

Case concerning terms of access to computer systems. Acted as counsel for industry group.

International arbitration between Indian and Japanese companies, concerning contract to build an electronics factory (1996). Acted for Indian company.

Mediations
Commercial contracts relating to IT and IP

IDEX* v UPEK/ST (2007)

Litigation involving right to recover payments in respect of use of four patents in field of fingerprint identification technology involving multi-jurisdictional issue.

Neuland* v Generics (2003)

Claim for breach of a pharmaceutical supply contract.

SSA v Megger* (2003) TCC

Dispute concerning scope of copyright licence raising points of estoppel relating to financial software.

NERC* v McKeown (2000-2)

Dispute concerning quality of a large software installation for major public research body.

Abraxas* v Nationwide (2002)

Claim for copyright infringement in insurance industry software.

Great Lakes* v Texaco (1994)

Commercial contract claim involving petroleum additives with several points on Articles 85/86ECOxyvital v Deacons (2007-)
Alleged professional negligence in prosecution of patent portfolio.

Amoco v Shell* (1989)

Breach of complex technical contract concerning redetermination of shares in oil field.

Professional negligence

Oxyvital v Deacons* (2007-)

Alleged professional negligence in prosecution of patent portfolio.

Artemi v CPA* (2003-4)

Alleged professional negligence in permitting lapse of patent involving issues of US law. Case settled following mediation.

(* indicates client)

Additional Information

Education

BA Physics and Philosophy (1st class, Oxford University, 1985). Wilde Prize (jointly) for Philosophy.

Diploma in Law (PCL, 1986). Queen Mother Scholar, Middle Temple.

LLM (Harvard Law School, 1987). Kennedy Scholar. Harlech Award.

 

Professional qualifications and appointments

Called to the English Bar 1988. Called to the New York Bar 1988.

Queen’s Counsel, 2003.

Deputy High Court Judge, 2006.

Visiting Professor of Law, University College, London, 2007.

Member of the panel for disputes arising under Rules of the Premier League, 2007.

Vice-Chair, Intellectual Property Bar Association, 2007.

Appointed Person under the Trade Marks Act, 2009.

 

Publications and Lectures

Joint editor/author (currently or previously) of: Modern Law of Copyright (forthcoming); Clerk and Lindsell on Torts; Encyclopedia of United Kingdom and European Patent Law; Guidebook to Intellectual Property Law; Atkin's Court Forms; Heidelberger Kommentar zum UWG. Numerous articles and shorter pieces.

Frequent lectures on IP-related topics including at Oxford University, University College London (Technology and IP LLM course), NYU (US), Munich (EPO), Brussels (EU Parliament), Trier (Richterakademie), Berlin (Boll Stiftung), Vienna (AIPPI), Stockholm, (Swedish Patent Office), Istanbul, Tokyo, Beijing and Singapore (APAA).

 

Others

Current

Trustee of the Natural History Museum.

Member of Oxford University Law Faculty advisory group.

Trustee of Kennedy Memorial Trust.

Governor, Bedales School.

Previous

Member of Commission on Intellectual Property Rights (2001-2002): Member of European Commission advisory group on the Biotechnology Patents Directive (2003): Trustee of the National Endowment for Science Technology and the Arts (2000-2006) - Chair of the Invention/Innovation and Finance/Audit Committees; Co-opted member of Bar Council and disciplinary panels (various dates).
 

 

Recent Activity

» Shanks -v- Unilever
» Teva, Accord, Lupin, and Generics UK trading as Mylan v Gilead Sciences Inc.
» (1) Novartis AG (2) LTS Lohmann therapie-systeme AG (3) Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd v (1) Focus Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd (2) Actavis Group PTC EHF (3) Actavis UK Ltd and between: (1) Novartis AG (2) LTS Lohmann therapie-systeme AG (3) Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd v Teva UK Ltd
» Teva UK LTD v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GMBH & Co KG [2016] EWCA Civ 1296
» Thoratec Europe Ltd v AIS GMBH Aachen Innovative Solutions (2016)
» Glaxo Wellcome Uk Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) v Sandoz Ltd (High Court) [2016] EWHC 1537 (Ch)
» Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Ltd, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and others [2016] EWHC 94 (Pat)
» AstraZeneca AB & Anor v KRKA dd Novo Mesto & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 484
» Novartis AG & Ors v Focus Pharmaceuticals Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 1068 (Pat) (27 April 2015)
» (1) Roger Maier (2) Assos of Switzerland SA -and- (1) ASOS plc (2) ASOS.com Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 220
» Vringo Infrastructure Inc v ZTE (UK) Ltd [2014] EWHC 3924 (Pat)
» Teva UK Ltd & Anor v Leo Pharma A/s [2014] EWHC 3096 (Pat)
» Shanks v Unilever [2014] EWHC 1647 (Pat)
» Ian Shanks v (1) Unilever Plc (2) Unilever NV (3) Unilever UK Central Resources Ltd O/259/13
» AstraZeneca AB & Anor v KRKA, DD Novo Mesto & Anor [2014] EWHC 84 (Pat)

What the Directories Say

"He has got an incredible mind, he is wonderfully articulate and he is incredibly accessible" "A smooth-as-silk silk who is willing and able to take a difficult case and find winning points in it. He sees the bigger picture, and clients like him because he's a great cross-examiner with a very delicate touch"
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2017

"A very strong practitioner who is very fluent, thoughtful and strategic." "He's excellent both on a personal level and in terms of his advocacy and legal insight"
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2017

"A barrister with a great mind who is very friendly"
Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2017

"An excellent advocate and very capable adviser"
Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2016

"He has a good sense of how judges will be thinking"
Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2016

"He has a good demeanour and interaction style with solicitors and clients"
Legal 500 (IT and Telecoms) 2016

"He is a polished, accomplished advocate." "You always turn to Daniel Alexander for any knotty issues on the copyright side."
Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2016

"Very good indeed - he is sensible, knowledgeable and a vey fine opponent"
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2016

"Brilliant at handling complex cases that others make seem convoluted. He identifies the key issues and pares them down with apparent effortlessness" "Charismatic and great with clients"
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2016

"Recommended for handling complex technological patent disputes"
Legal 500 (IT and Telecoms) 2015

"He knows his cases inside out, no stones are left unturned in his preparation"
Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2015

"Has enjoyed a career in IP few silks can match, and has appeared in many of the most significant patent, trade mark and copyright actions of the past 20 years"
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2015

"Extremely well regarded and an absolutely superb advocate" "He understands how judges' minds work, so knows how to manage the court really well"
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2015

"Admired for his his work in digital technology cases. Judges trust him because he only runs the best points"
Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2015

"He is quite simply superb, and one of the very best at the patent bar"
Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2015

 

 

  • What the Directories Say
  • "He has got an incredible mind, he is wonderfully articulate and he is incredibly accessible" "A smooth-as-silk silk who is willing and able to take a difficult case and find winning points in it. He sees the bigger picture, and clients like him because he's a great cross-examiner with a very delicate touch"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2017

    "A very strong practitioner who is very fluent, thoughtful and strategic." "He's excellent both on a personal level and in terms of his advocacy and legal insight"
    Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2017

    "A barrister with a great mind who is very friendly"
    Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2017

    "An excellent advocate and very capable adviser"
    Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2016

    "He has a good sense of how judges will be thinking"
    Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2016

    "He has a good demeanour and interaction style with solicitors and clients"
    Legal 500 (IT and Telecoms) 2016

    "He is a polished, accomplished advocate." "You always turn to Daniel Alexander for any knotty issues on the copyright side."
    Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2016

    "Very good indeed - he is sensible, knowledgeable and a vey fine opponent"
    Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2016

    "Brilliant at handling complex cases that others make seem convoluted. He identifies the key issues and pares them down with apparent effortlessness" "Charismatic and great with clients"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2016

    "Recommended for handling complex technological patent disputes"
    Legal 500 (IT and Telecoms) 2015

    "He knows his cases inside out, no stones are left unturned in his preparation"
    Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2015

    "Has enjoyed a career in IP few silks can match, and has appeared in many of the most significant patent, trade mark and copyright actions of the past 20 years"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2015

    "Extremely well regarded and an absolutely superb advocate" "He understands how judges' minds work, so knows how to manage the court really well"
    Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2015

    "Admired for his his work in digital technology cases. Judges trust him because he only runs the best points"
    Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2015

    "He is quite simply superb, and one of the very best at the patent bar"
    Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2015