NIPC Law

Vape Cloud Chasing Author VAPES   Licence CC BY-2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justice Miles)  Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd and others [2025] EWHC 1239 (Ch) (21 May 2025) Updated 16 May 2026 This was an application by Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd (Shenzhen) to restrain Bargain Busting Ltd ("BB") from threatening trade mark infringement proceedings against Shenzhen's distributors and retailers.  BB is the registered proprietor of UK trade marks  UK00003235344  and  UK00003534551 , which Shenzhen has challenged on the grounds of non-use and invalidity.  BB has also applied to register CRYSTAL BAR  as a trade mark under trade mark number UK00003786148 .  Shenzhen responded to BB's threats by seeking an order under s .21C  to prevent BB from making further threats of proceedings against Shenzhen's distributors and retailers.  It also sought information o...

Alcatel-Lucent SA's Head Office in Boulogne-Bilancourt Author AnaBé   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Newey, Arnold and Snowden)  Alcatel Lucent SAS v Amazon Digital UK Ltd and other s [2025] EWCA Civ 43 (28 Jan 2025) This was the second of three cases in which the Court of Appeal had to consider whether a willing licensor of a portfolio of patents declared essential to one or more standards (" standard-essential patents" or "SEPs" ) would grant an implementer of those standards who has undertaken to take a licence to that portfolio on the terms to be determined by the Patents Court to be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") an interim licence pending that determination.  The other cases were  Panasonic Holdings Corporation v Xiaomi Technology UK Ltd and others [2024] EWCA Civ 1143 (3 Oct 2024) which I discussed in  FRAND - Panasonic Holdings Corporation v Xiaomi Technology UK ...

Great Hall, Royal Courts of Justice Author Aurelien Guichard   Licence CC BY-SA 2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Newey and Arnold and Lady Justice Falk)  Lenovo Group Ltd and others v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) and another [2025] EWCA Civ 182 (28 Feb 2025 ) This was an appeal against Mr Justice Richards's refusal to grant a declaration that a willing licensor and a willing licensee in the situation of the parties to this litigation would agree to, and actually enter into, a short-term cross-licence that would expire once either an English court or the US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina fixes the terms of a FRAND cross-licence (see  Lenovo Group Ltd and others v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) and another [2024] EWHC 2941 (Pat) (19 Nov 2024)). The appeal was heard by Lords Justices Newey and Arnold and Lady Justice Falk on 25 Feb 2025 and judgment was handed down on...

Jane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon) Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH and others v Aspire Pharma Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 711 (Pat) (27 March 2024) Rivaroxaban  is an anticoagulant medication used to treat and prevent blood clots, particularly deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary emboli and atrial fibrillation after hip or knee surgery.  Until the hearing of this application Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH, its holding and associated companies enjoyed a monopoly of the market for rivaroxaban in the UK, That was because Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH held a patent for the product as a compound which was extended until 1 April 2024 by a supplementary protection certificate. Aspire Pharma Ltd.  was one of several pharmaceutical companies that hoped to supply generic rivaroxaban upon the expiry of the SPC.  However, Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH also held European patent number 1 845 961 B1 for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders with rivaroxa...

  Ja ne Lambert irst  Chancery Division (Mr Justice Mellor)  A U Vodka Ltd v NE10 Vodka Ltd and another [2022] EWHC 2371 (Ch) (21 Sept 2022) The claimant in these proceedings distilled and distributed the vodka on the left.  The first defendant the vodka on the right.  The claimant applied for an interim injunction to retrain the first defendant and its sole director and shareholder (the second defendant) from marketing and selling the vodka on the right until trial or further order.   The defendants applied to strike out the claim against the second defendant and sought an expedited trial.   The application and cross-applications came on before Mr Justice Mellor as applications by order on 16 Aug 2022.  At the end of the hearing, his lordship refused the application for an injunction and the cross-application for a strikeout but granted a speedy trial.   He set out his reasons in  AU Vodka Ltd v NE10 Vodka Ltd and anothe...

Author User:Jynto   Licence CCO 1.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor)  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd and another v Teva UK Ltd [2022] EWHC 954 (Pat) (26 April 2022) This was an application by    Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd., the proprietor of  European patent (UK)  3,103,443 , and Flynn Pharma Limited, Neurim's exclusive licensee, for an interim injunction to restrain Teva UK Ltd. from disposing, offering for sale or disposal, selling or supplying any generic version of the claimants'  Circadin  product that falls within any of the claims of that patent or that has been manufactured by any process that falls within any of its claims until judgment or further order.  An interim injunction is a court order to do, stop doing or not to do something on pain of punishment for disobedience.  The approach by which a court decides whether or not to make such an order was set out ...