'A number of great IT and telecoms barristers.'
Legal 500 2010
"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
'A veritable powerhouse of IP expertise'
Chambers and Partners 2011
"an impressive set with quality from the top
silk down to the most junior barristers."
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2013
"8 New Square brims with barristers experienced in fighting fiendishly complex, high-value IT and telecoms disputes."
Chambers & Partners 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
'An incredibly good set for IP matters'.
Legal 500 2010
'Top drawer IP set.'
Legal 500 2010
'excellence on IT matters'
Legal 500 (Information Technology) 2010
The clerks are described as "helpful," "generous" and "very good at knowing what you want."
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2013
'Practical and helpful clerks" provide a "smooth and personable service.'
Chambers and Partners 2011
"8 New Square brims with barristers experienced in fighting fiendishly complex, high-value IT and telecoms disputes."
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2014
"There are great people there at all levels and the clerks are very accommodating."
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual property) 2014
Hospira UK Limited v Genentech Inc [2015] EWHC 1796 (Pat)
Case Summary | Judgment | 24 June 2015
Members of chambers recently appeared in this third of a series of actions brought by Hospira in relation to Genentech’s patents in respect of trastuzumab, marketed by Genentech under the trade mark Herceptin. This action concerned Genentech’s patent claiming the use of trastuzumab in combination with a taxane for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer, in particular by extending the time to progression.
Richard Meade QC (instructed by Taylor Wessing LLP) appeared for Hospira, which alleged that the claims in the patent were anticipated by, alternatively obvious over, the prior art which described an ongoing Phase III trial of trastuzumab in combination with paclitaxel and another agent. Michael Tappin QC and Mark Chacksfield (instructed by Marks & Clerk Solicitors LLP) appeared for Genentech.
After a four-day trial, Arnold J held the patent invalid, finding that the claims in the patent were novel over the prior art but obvious in light of it.