8 NEW SQUARE

020 7405 4321

Patent Law

 

Members of chambers offer unrivalled experience in the conduct of all types of patent litigation in the UK and abroad. We cover all aspects of the law relating to patents and supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) – from Patent Office oppositions and entitlement disputes, to revocation and infringement actions in the Patents Court and the Patents County Court and all levels of appeal up to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court as well as references to the European Court of Justice. We are also used to working as part of a team of lawyers from different jurisdictions in the conduct of multi-national patent litigation. Several members have extensive experience in the European Patent Office, particularly at the Boards of Appeal level.

We are able to offer technical and scientific expertise over a wide range of disciplines including cutting edge science and technology. We are pre-eminent amongst IP counsel in biotechnology with 25 years of conducting litigation in this area. Members of 8 New Square have appeared in nearly all of the significant biotechnology cases including the landmark House of Lords cases Biogen v Medeva and Kirin-Amgen v Hoechst Marion Roussel.

Unified Patent Court (UPC):

At the end of 2012, the EU agreed to move forward with the creation of a Unified Patent Court to provide an option for centralized patent litigation in the EU. The precise arrangements have yet to be finalized and the new system will take some time to get up and running, but it is already clear that London and English law in particular will play a leading role, with a biotechnology and chemistry specialist centre of the Central Division based here and many patents (and the relevant prior art) written in English.

Members of chambers are well placed to assist clients in navigating this new landscape both in the UK and elsewhere in the EU. 8 New Square provides one of the best combinations of experience in Europe of (i) infringement and validity cases at trial (ii) oppositions in the EPO (including before the TBA and EBA) and (iii) patent and other IP cases under EU law in the European Court of Justice. Members of 8 New Square have been involved in more than 60 cases at the Court of Justice in the field of intellectual property law, including almost all of the significant recent cases in the areas of patent law and related jurisdictional issues which have already been harmonised by EU rules. Members of chambers are comfortable in all of these fora, as well as before arbitral panels with members drawn from different countries. The new system, which will operate under EU law, is likely to require experience drawn from all of these areas.

Members of 8 New Square have been providing input into the drafting rules of procedure and will be continuing to work to ensure that the system provides speedy and efficient dispute resolution for those who chose to use the UPC instead of national courts
Our counsel also have wide practical experience in advising and conducting patent litigation in the following fields: pharmaceuticals, oil and gas technology, electronics and telecommunications, general engineering and consumer products.  Significant cases from these areas include:

  • Generics (UK) v Lundbeck (House of Lords) – validity of patent for antidepressant drug
  • Kelly and Chiu v GE Healthcare (Patents Court) –employee-invention compensation for patent relating to radioactive imaging agent
  • Generics (UK) v Daiichi Pharmaceutical Co (Court of Appeal) – validity of patent and SPC for enantiomeric drug
  • Conor Medsystems v Angiotech Pharmaceuticals (House of Lords) – validity of drug-eluting stent patent
  • Vector Corp v Glatt (Court of Appeal) – validity of patent relating to fluidised bed technology
  • Yeda Research and Development Co v Rhone-Poulenc-Rorer (House of Lords) – patent entitlement dispute
  • Halliburton v Smith (Court of Appeal) – validity of patent relating to drill bits used in oil exploration
  • Folding Attic Stairs v Loft Stairs Co (Patents Court) – validity of patent for folding attic stairs
  • Symbian Ltd’s Patent (Court of Appeal) – patentability of computer programs
  • Research in Motion v Visto Corp (Patents Court) – infringement proceedings relating to BlackBerry® techonology
  • Nokia v Interdigital Technology Corporation – patent relating to mobile phone technology 
  • Dyson v Hoover (Court of Appeal) –  patent for cyclonic vacuum cleaners
  • Haberman v Jackel (Patents Court) – patent for babies drinking cups