Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
Paying for delay and patent settlement arrangements — the European Commission (at last) publishes the Lundbeck decision
In 2013 the European Commission announced that it had fined H Lundbeck A/S in respect of infringements of Art 101 of the TFEU and the EEA Agreement. It has finally set out the basis for the infringements.
Birss J rules on product by process claim construction, extension of scope, added matter and obviousness in Hospira v Genentech.
In Teva v Leo, Mr Justice Birss was asked to decide whether two patents relating to a combined formulation for treatment of psoriasis were valid and infringed.
Supreme Court holds patent infringement not ‘turpitude’/‘illegality’ for the purposes of the defence of illegality
The infringement of a patent does not constitute ‘turpitude’ for the purposes of the defence of illegality (Les Laboratoires Servier & another v Apotex Inc).
Guidance on interaction between UK and EPO proceedings and scope of cross-undertakings in damages required for injunctions
In Actavis v Pharmacia, Arnold J issued two important judgments regarding the interaction between UK patent actions and opposition proceedings at the EPO.
In a recent Technical Board of Appeal decision, the European Patent Office has shed some light upon the boundaries of the prohibition against double patenting.
New patent law proposals laid in Parliament could result in clinical trials being brought back to the UK.