'Practical and helpful clerks" provide a "smooth and personable service.'
Chambers and Partners 2011
The clerks are described as "helpful," "generous" and "very good at knowing what you want."
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2013
"8 New Square brims with barristers experienced in fighting fiendishly complex, high-value IT and telecoms disputes."
Chambers & Partners 2014
'A veritable powerhouse of IP expertise'
Chambers and Partners 2011
'excellence on IT matters'
Legal 500 (Information Technology) 2010
"8 New Square brims with barristers experienced in fighting fiendishly complex, high-value IT and telecoms disputes."
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2014
'A number of great IT and telecoms barristers.'
Legal 500 2010
'An incredibly good set for IP matters'.
Legal 500 2010
"an impressive set with quality from the top
silk down to the most junior barristers."
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2013
'Top drawer IP set.'
Legal 500 2010
"There are great people there at all levels and the clerks are very accommodating."
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual property) 2014
"8 New Square is undoubtedly one of the leading sets for trade mark and copyright cases within the media and entertainment sphere, so much so that stablemates here frequently find themselves pitted against each other in major cases."
Chambers & Partners (Media & Entertainment) 2014
"Fantastic roster of talent" and recommended for being "very modern, forward-thinking and providing sound commercial advice" as well as offering instructing solicitors "a very broad skill set in the soft IP space."
Chambers & Partners 2017
Idenix Pharmaceuticals Inc. v Gilead Sciences, Court of Appeal - Awaiting Judgment
Case Summary | 19 July 2016
Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC, Tom Moody-Stuart and William Duncan all acted for Gilead (together with Justin Turner QC) in these patent infringement proceedings brought by Idenix in respect of Gilead’s product “Sovaldi” . The trial was heard over three weeks before Arnold J in 2014, who dismissed Idenix’s claims of patent infringement and held in favour of Gilead. The judge held that Sovaldi represents a significant breakthrough in the treatment of the Hepatitis C virus and that Idenix’s patent was invalid for novelty, lack of inventive step and insufficiency.
Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC, Tom Moody-Stuart and William Duncan were instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills LLP