8 NEW SQUARE

020 7405 4321

Lindsay Lane

 


Year of call: 1996

Lindsay Lane read Natural Sciences and Law at Cambridge. She practises in all areas of intellectual property law including patents, trade marks, copyright, database rights, registered designs, design right, passing off and confidential information and in media and entertainment law. She is recommended in the Legal 500 and in Chambers and Partners for both intellectual property and media and entertainment.

Recent notable cases include the patent cases Accord v Medac and Generics v Richter Gedeon; Wade v BSkyB, a television format case; BBC v Eos, in the Copyright Tribunal and numerous cases brought on behalf of the Premier League for copyright infringement.

Other cases of note include Schutz v Werit in the Supreme Court, a patent case about making/repair; Phones 4u v Phone4u.co.uk in the Court of Appeal on trade mark infringement and passing off; Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers, an action for copyright and breach of confidence relating to the publication of extracts from the Prince's diaries in the Mail on Sunday, and Eddie Irvine v Talksport, which established for the first time in the United Kingdom the right of celebrities to prevent false endorsement under the law of passing off. Lindsay has particular expertise in rights in databases having been instructed in BHB v William Hill and the various cases concerning rights in football-related data brought by Football Dataco.  

Lindsay is also co-author of Laddie, Prescott and Vitoria on The Modern Law of Copyright and Designs.

Patents

Lindsay appeared in the definitive authority on patent interpretation in the House of Lords Kirin Amgen v Hoechst Marion Roussel, a case relating to recombinant DNA technology; as well as in the Supreme Court in Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd, on the issue of repair.  Other significant  patent cases include: Accord V Medac; Generics v Richter Gedeon and Generics v Yeda, all pharmaceutical cases, Menashe Business Mercantile Ltd v William Hill Organization Ltd, on jurisdiction; American Home Products Corp. v Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd, on second medical use; and Scanvaegt International A/S v Pelcombe Ltd, in the Court of Appeal.

Accord Healthcare Ltd v Medac Gesellschaft Fur Klinsche Spezialpraparate MbH [2016] EWHC (Pat) 24

Claim for invalidity in relation to a patent for a formulation of methotrexate for the treatment of inflammatory automimmune diseases. Junior Counsel for the Claimant.

Glass v Freyssinet Ltd [2015] EWHC 2972 (IPEC)

Patent infringement and validity case about a drug to treat multiple sclerosis. Junior Counsel for the Claimant

Generics UK Ltd v Richter Gedeon [2014] EWHC 1666 (Pat)

Claim for invalidity in relation to a dosage regimen patent for emergency contraception. Junior Counsel for the Defendant.

Generics (UK) Ltd v Yeda Research & Development Co Ltd [2012] EWHC 1848 (Pat)

Patent infringement and validity case about a drug to treat multiple sclerosis. Junior Counsel for the Claimant.

Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd [2013] RPC 16

Patent infringement and validity case concerning intermediate bulk containers and the issue of repair which was ultimately resolved in the Supreme Court. Junior Counsel for the Claimant.
 

Kirin-Amgen Inc. v Transkaryotic Therapies Inc. [2005] 1 All ER 667

Appeal to the House of Lords on infringement, insufficiency and novelty of patent concerning recombinant DNA technology. Now the definitive authority on patent construction and infringement. Junior counsel for TKT.

Menashe Business Mercantile Ltd v William Hill Organization Ltd [2003] RPC 31

Appeal to the Court of Appeal on preliminary issue concerning jurisdiction in patent infringement. Junior counsel for Menashe.

Kirin-Amgen Inc. v Transkaryotic Therapies Inc. [2002] RPC 43

Application to amend patent. Junior counsel for TKT.

American Home Products Corp. v Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd [2000] RPC 547

Trial on infringement and sufficiency of Swiss form patent for the transplant drug, rapamycin. Junior counsel for AHP.

Scanvaegt International A/S v Pelcombe Ltd [1998] FSR 786

Appeal concerning the construction and infringement of a patent for a process for batching products. Junior counsel for Pelcombe.

  • What the Directories Say
  • "She is an experienced counsel with a comprehensive and detailed knowledge of copyright law." "She has a very clear approach and is good at cutting through to what really matters"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2017

    "Clever and efficient and delivers pragmatic advice"
    Chambers & Partners (Media and Entertainment) 2017

    "She is good to work with and has an impressive commercial approach."
    Legal 500 (Intellectual property) 2017

    "She really thinks about achieving the clients commercial goals in terms of timing and strategy."
    Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2017

    "Known for television copyright matters"
    Legal 500 (Media and entertainment) 2016

    "Very good for IPEC trials"
    Legal 500 (Intellectual property) 2016

    "Her advice was very helpful and very constructive." "She's an effective advocate and can drive the point home when she needs to"
    Chambers & Partners (Media and Entertainment) 2016

    "Composed, confident and practical, she's a persuasive advocate." "Very good under fire and gets the ear of the tribunal"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2016

    "She has an excellent grasp of procedural and technical issues"
    Legal 500 (Intellectual property) 2015

    "Very smart and very tough. She is persistent in her advocacy, very commercial and great with clients" "She's sharp-witted and highly responsive" 
    Chambers & Partners (Media and Entertainment) 2015

    "Clients are very impressed by her personable manner and commercial outlook"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2015