'Top drawer IP set.'
Legal 500 2010
"an impressive set with quality from the top
silk down to the most junior barristers."
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2013
'An incredibly good set for IP matters'.
Legal 500 2010
"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
'Practical and helpful clerks" provide a "smooth and personable service.'
Chambers and Partners 2011
"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
"8 New Square brims with barristers experienced in fighting fiendishly complex, high-value IT and telecoms disputes."
Chambers & Partners 2014
The clerks are described as "helpful," "generous" and "very good at knowing what you want."
Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2013
'A number of great IT and telecoms barristers.'
Legal 500 2010
'excellence on IT matters'
Legal 500 (Information Technology) 2010
'A veritable powerhouse of IP expertise'
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
Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Ltd, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and others [2016] EWHC 576 (Pat)
Case Summary | Judgment | 22 March 2016
Adrian Speck QC, Mark Chacksfield and Tom Jones (instructed by EIP legal) recently appeared for Unwired Planet in the third of four technical trials (Trial C) concerning alleged infringement of patents held by Unwired Planet and said to be essential to various mobile telecommunications standards. The trial concerned the alleged infringement of patent EP (UK) 1,230,818, entitled “a method for improving handovers between mobile telecommunications systems”.
Following trial, Birss J found the patent to be valid and infringed, and essential to the relevant telecoms standards.