Posts

Showing posts with the label payment on account

Costs - Price v Flitcraft

Image
Author Pierre Adolphe Valett e   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Nicholas Caddick KC)  Price and others v Flitcraft Ltd and other s [2023] EWHC 695 (Pat) (3 April 2023) I discussed Nicholas Caddick KC's judgment in  Price and others v Flitcraft Ltd and other s [2022] EWHC 3381 (Pat) (20 Dec 2022) in Patents, Copyright and Passing off - Price v Flitcraft Lt d on 16 Jan 2022 and  A Patent Trial in Manchester at Last - Price v Flitcraft Lt d   in IP Northwest on 17 Jan 2023,  This was an action for patent and copyright infringement and passing off.  The first claimant, Philip Price, did not win on anything but the second claimant, Supawall Ltd, did have some success with the patent claim though not with passing off.  As it was not obvious which party was the overall winner a further hearing took place on  16 March 2023 to decide which of those parties should pay which costs.  The judgment was handed down on 3 April 2023 ( Price and others v F...

Certificates of Contested Validity - Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and others

Image
Author  Subhrajyoti Saha,   Licence  CC BY-SA 4.0   Source  Wikipedia   Jane Lambert  Patents Court (Mr Justice Birss) Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 3248 (Pat) (23 Nov 2020) On 23 Nov 2020 Mr Justice Birss held a hearing to decide the consequences of his judgment in  Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 2746 (Pat) (16 Oct 2020)  which I discussed in  Patents - Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and others   14 Nov 2020.  It will be recalled that the patent in suit was found to be valid and essential to the relevant standard, that the counterclaim for revocation failed and the claim for infringement on the basis of compliance with the standard succeeded.  The claimants were the clear winners and they were entitled to their costs. The first question for the judge was upon what basis thos...