'excellence on IT matters'
Legal 500 (Information Technology) 2010
'A number of great IT and telecoms barristers.'
Legal 500 2010
'An incredibly good set for IP matters'.
Legal 500 2010
'A veritable powerhouse of IP expertise'
Chambers and Partners 2011
'Top drawer IP set.'
Legal 500 2010
'Practical and helpful clerks" provide a "smooth and personable service.'
Chambers and Partners 2011
'outstanding IP chambers'
Legal 500 2008
'clerking team that exhibits 'perfect communication''
Legal 500 2008
'8 New Square successfully parlays its renowned IP expertise into success in the IT sector.'
Chambers & Partners (Information Technology) 2009
Armour Group v Leisuretech Electronics [2008] EWHC 2797 (Pat)
Case Summary | Judgment | 14 November 2008
Daniel Alexander QC and James Abrahams represented the Claimant Armour and Richard Meade QC and Robert Smith represented Leisuretech Electronics in the trial held in October 2008. Armour sought revocation of Leisuretech's patent for a system for the provision of stereo sound to different rooms from a single source using a particular type of 'Cat 5 cable'. Armour claimed that the patent was obvious over the common general knowledge. It was accepted by both parties that if the patent was valid then Leisuretech would be liable for infringement. The Judge held that the patent was invalid as it lacked an inventive step.