UK – Saint Gobain v. 3M Innovative Properties

Posted: July 11th, 2022

Saint-Gobain Adfors SAS v 3M Innovative Properties Co [2022] EWHC 1666 (Pat), 28 Jun 2022 A recent decision by Michael Tappin QC, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, has confirmed that post-judgment amendment in the UK remains very difficult to achieve and could even be viewed by the court as an abuse […]


FR – French Supreme Court embraces crossborder injunctions

Posted: July 7th, 2022

French Supreme Court embraces crossborder injunctions, by Willem Hoyng, HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER  In a decision of 29 June 2022 in a case between the French company Hutchinson which owns an EP patent (EP 340) in among others France, the UK and Germany and a UK company, a South African company and two French companies the […]


UK – Alcon Research v. Pharmathen and Aspire Pharma

Posted: July 7th, 2022

Alcon Research LLC and another v Pharmathen SA and Aspire Pharma Limited, Court of Appeal, London, UK, 28 June 2022, [2022] EWCA Civ 845 The English Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Arnold giving the leading judgment with whom Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Nugee agreed) has rejected an appeal by Aspire Pharma Limited (“Aspire”) […]


UK – Teva & Sandoz v. Astellas

Posted: July 6th, 2022

Overview In two actions that were heard together, Teva and Sandoz (‘the Claimants’) sought revocation of Astellas’ patent EP (UK) 1 559 427 B1 (‘the Patent’). The patent relates to a compound mirabegron (sold under the name Betmiga) which is used to treat overactive bladder (OAB). Mirabegron is a β3 adrenoreceptor (“β3-AR”) agonist. Astellas counterclaimed […]


NL – Boston Scientific v. Cook

Posted: June 20th, 2022

Boston Scientific Limited and Boston Scientific Medical Device Limited v. Coot Europe Finance B.V., Cook Nederland B.V., Cook Medical Nederland B.V., Cook Ireland Limited, Cook Medical Europe Limited, Cook Medical EMEA Group Limited and Cook France Sarl, District Court Amsterdam 3 May 2022, Case no. C/13/713/564 / KG ZA 22-118 Recently a judgment has been […]


NL – Barco v. Sahara

Posted: June 9th, 2022

Barco N.V. v. Sahara Presentation Systems PLC, District Cout The Hague, 1 June 2022, Case No. HA ZA 19-503 Barco holds EP ‘668 for an ‘Electronic tool and methods for meetings’and markets a presentation system under de name ‘ClickShare’ that incorporates the EP ‘668 technology. ClickShare enables participants to a meeting to share images and […]


IT – Garbuio v. Comas / Infringement by equivalents

Posted: June 2nd, 2022

The Italian Supreme Court on patent infringement by equivalents: central relevance must be given to the individual elements claimed by the patent By judgment no. 120 on 4th January 2022, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the topic of patent infringement by equivalents. In particular, the Court provided guidance on two debated issues under Italian law: […]


NL – Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Sandoz / Apaxiban

Posted: May 19th, 2022

Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company v. Sandoz B.V., District Court The Hague (interlocutory decision), 10 May 2022, Case no.  ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:4385 BMS markets the medicine Eliquis®, with apixaban as the active ingredient. Apixaban is a substance that inhibits the action of factor Xa. Inhibiting factor Xa helps prevent blood clots from forming. Eliquis® is used […]


IT – Novartis Pharma v. Medac Farma

Posted: May 5th, 2022

Novartis Pharma vs. Medac Farma, Court of Milan, 10 January 2022, Case number 11933/2022 A decision on second medical use patent and skinny labelling in Italy was handed down by the Court of Milan on 10 January 2022. The Court held skinny label alone as insufficient to avoid infringement of second medical use claims and […]


CJEU – Phoenix v. Harting

Posted: April 29th, 2022

Preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU in the case between Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG v. HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG, 28 April 2022, Case No. C‑44/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:309 “By its question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 9(1) of Directive 2004/48 must be interpreted as […]