The Lawyer Africa Elite 2014 features an in-depth look at 46 leading independent firms’ strategies in 15 key sub-Saharan jurisdictions, as well as the views of in-house counsel from some of Africa’s largest companies... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan client Samsung lost a landmark patent case against arch-rival Apple over the weekend with a US court ordering Samsung to pay $1bn (£655m) in damages for infringing several of the iPhone maker’s designs.
The smartphone giants had been locked in battle after accusing each other of copying key features found in the iPhone and iPad, with Charles Verhoeven of Quinn Emanuel advising Samsung and San Francisco-based Harold McElhinny of Morrison & Foerster (MoFo) advising Apple. The lead trial counsel for Apple, which initially sought $2.5bn in damages, is WilmerHale’s former co-managing partner William Lee.
A nine-person jury in San Jose, California is understood to have deliberated for almost three days before rejecting all of Samsung’s infringement claims and siding with the iPhone maker, concluding that a number of Samsung handsets infringed the innovative technology of Apple’s iPhone.
In an internal memo released on Sunday, Samsung said that Apple had refused to settle outside of court, adding: “History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.”
Meanwhile, Apple is understood to have asked a US court to ban eight phones - including the Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge, Galaxy Prevail and the Galaxy S2 - at the centre of Samsung’s lawsuit.
The tech giants have filed similar lawsuits around the world, with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer client Apple ordered to run a series of adverts in the British press last month, alerting consumers that Samsung did not copy the iPad after the High Court found that Galaxy did not infringe the iPad maker’s intellectual property.
View our related files section on the right hand side.