Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
Find out more
Effectively resolving disputes involving patented technology requires a specialist skill set. We work with clients to help them identify and protect what are often their key business assets; some of the UK’s best-known companies trust us to advise them to combat allegations of infringement of third party intellectual property rights.
Our team draws on its experience from the worlds of engineering, electronics, manufacturing, telecommunications and life sciences to deliver a service that is tailored to your industry and innovation - a significant proportion of our team have worked with, been on secondment to or worked in house at companies across these sectors.
Where the issue of infringement or validity of a patent becomes a live issue, we have extensive experience of litigating across many of the forums in the UK, whether this be in the Court of Appeal, High Court, Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court as well as experience with the UK and European Intellectual Property Offices.
The Patents Court has granted declarations that dosage regimens were obvious at the claimed priority dates of certain of AbbVie’s patents and patent applications.
In this three minute video Kathleen Fox Murphy talks about the costs involved in UK patent litigation and how you can reduce these costs, looking particularly at the high court shorter trials scheme pilot and the IPEC.
In this video Giles Parsons looks at the case of Schenck Rotec v Universal Balancing Limited, focusing on the experimental use defence, why it is misunderstood, and other defences to patent infringement.
In this video Mark Daniels, Head of Patents, takes a look back on the year to highlight key themes relating to patents coming out of the courts.
Very happy with the service from a very switched on team. They did a great job and this work was and continues to be, appreciated by my directors.
At London Taxi Corporation we value our intellectual property highly. The team ensures that the management and enforcement of our rights is joined up and frankly easier to manage.
On the contentious front, Browne Jacobson acted for the London Taxi Corporation in its spat with Frazer-Nash Research Limited and Ecotive – a multi-layered dispute of significant legal and public interest.
Advising the provider of a cloud based customer intelligence platform in respect of a patent infringement and validity and breach of confidence dispute in which our client was the claimant. The litigation involved a large number of complex issues surrounding infringement, validity, patentable subject matter and amendment of a software patent. A corresponding European Patent was being opposed in the EPO at the same time.
Acting for a household name in the health sector in defence of allegations of patent infringement in respect of a therapeutically crucial diagnostic test.
Advising a leading 3D holographic technology company in respect of a complex patent infringement and validity dispute in which our client was the Claimant. The matter involved a number of disputes including the requirement for disclosures to be enabling, the standard of proof required in UK patent proceedings, and international patent rights exhaustion. As a result of two of the four defendants’ failure to pay relevant costs orders flowing from successful interim applicatons, our client applied for and obtained judgment for infringement of its patent.
Acting on behalf of one of the world's largest manufacturers of speciality metal cutting products in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Our client (a US based company) holds a global portfolio of patents that relate to new and innovative cutting geometry, as applied to high feed milling machinery. As well as raising complex issues of validity and infringement, the above proceedings remain one of the few cases where the interrelationship between amendment in the national Patent Court and the European Patent Office has been considered.
Advising Rapiscan Systems Limited and its parent, OSI Systems Incon patent infringement proceedings brought by American Science & Engineering and, at the same time, a revocation action at the UK Intellectual Property Office relating to one of Rapiscan’s backscatter x-ray detection patents. We were able to instantly provide them with a dedicated team which understands Rapiscan’s commercial and technical objectives, dealing with a dispute that is valued in excess of £10 million, listed with technical difficulty rating of 4, and with a five day trial listed for March 2016.
The Football Association Premier League “FAPL” sought an injunction against internet service providers (most of which consented or did not object) requiring them to block access to servers used to deliver infringing streams of Premier League footage.
Advocate General Kolkott’s opinion on 2 December 2016 (EUIPO v Szajner - C-598/14 P) highlights the importance of keeping up with national case law when dealing with EU trade mark opposition or invalidity appeal proceedings.
Traditional challenges to the inventive step of a patent are based on an allegation that it would be obvious to take a step from a specific item of prior art to the claimed invention.
The Court of Appeal has handed down its judgment on the long-running Pregabalin saga.
Keep up with the latest content from Browne Jacobson:
© Copyright Browne Jacobson LLP 2017 - All rights reserved