Posts

Showing posts with the label stay

The Appeal in Acer v Nokia

Image
  Acer Building Nokia’s Head Office Author Solomon203 Licence CC BY-SA 3.0 Source Wikimedia Commons Author pikkuanna Licence CC BY-SA 2.0 Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Jackson, Arnold and Zacaroli)  Acer Inc and Another v Nokia Technologies OY [2026] EWCA Civ 564 (12 May 2026) This was an appeal by Nokia Technologies OY ("Nokia") against the order of Mr Justice Mellor in  Acer Inc. and others v Nokia Technologies OY [2025] EWHC 3331 (Pat) of 18 Dec 2025 rejecting Nokia's challenge to the jurisdiction of the English courts, refusing a stay on case management grounds and granting some interim licence declarations that had been sought by Acer Inc. and Acer UK Limited ("Acer") and Asustek Computer Inc. and Asus Global Pte Ltd. ("Asus"). The Parties Nokia owned or had rights to license a portfolio of patents with claims that have been declared essential to the International Telecommunication Union Telecommunicatio...

FRAND - Nokia Technologies v Oneplus Technology

Image
Supreme People's Court of the Peoples' Republic of China Author ONUnicorn   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia   Common   J ane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon)  Nokia Technologies OY and another v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and other s (Rev1) [2021] EWHC 2952 (Pat) (4 Nov 2021) This was an application to HH Judge Hacon sitting as a judge of the Patents Court to set aside service of patent infringement proceedings on defendants that had been incorporated in China and to stay the action against the defendants that had been incorporated here to abide the outcome of proceedings in China to determine the terms of a FRAND licence for the claimants' patent portfolio on the basis that China was the more appropriate forum.  Alternatively, a stay of the whole action or at least the determination of the licence terms was sought on case management grounds.        The applicants contended that the circumstances that had led to...

Staying Expedited Proceedings - Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Mylan

Image
Author Karjis Sambrans   Licence  CC BY 2.0   Source Wikimedia Common s Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Ian Karet)  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd another v Generics (UK) Ltd (T/A Viatris) and another [2021] EWHC 2897 (Pat) (29 Ort 2021) This was an application by Generics (UK) Limited and Mylan UK Healthcare Limited ("Mylan") for a stay of the expedited trial that had been ordered by Mr Justice Mellor in  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd and another v Generics UK Ltd (t/a Mylan) and another [2021] EWHC 2198 (Pat) (2 Aug 2021) which I discussed in Practice - Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Mylan   on 30 March 2022.  The purpose of the proposed stay was to await the outcome of opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office under Part V of the European Patent Convention.  The outcome of those proceedings including an appeal could be expected in 2023 or  2024. The reason why Mr Justice Mellor ordered an expedited trial is that Eur...

The Form of the Carve Out and Publication Order: Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers

Image
By Seauton , 24 February 2019 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0,   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Lord Justice Warby) HRH the Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 669 (Ch) (22 March 2021) Following the largely successful summary judgment application by Her Royal Highness, The Duchess of Sussex against the publisher of The Mail on Sunday and the MailOnline in HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd . [2021] WLR(D) 100, [2021] 4 WLR 35, [2021] EWHC 273 (Ch) which I discussed in Summary Judgment - Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers on 12 Feb 2021, Lord Justice Warby granted a declaration, injunction and publication order to the duchess and gave directions for the conduct of the remaining proceedings in HHR The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 510 (Ch) (5 March 2021). I discussed those proceedings in Judgment and Order: Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd on 9 March 2021, There remained issues over the wordin...

The Effect of an Arbitration Clause in a Trade Mark Coexistence Agreement on IP Litigation - Lifestyle Equities CV and another v Hornby Street and others

Image
Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (HH Judge Hacon)  Lifestyle Equities CV and another v Hornby Street (MCR) Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 3320 (IPEC) (30 Nov 2020) The first claimant has registered the following sign in the EU and UK as trade marks for clothes and various other goods. The second claimant is its exclusive licensee. They have brought proceedings in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ("IPEC")  alleging trade mark infringement and passing off arising from the use of the following mark in the UK: Disputes had arisen between the previous owners of the Beverly Hills mark and the registered proprietor of the Santa Barbara mark,  These were settled in 1997 by a co-existence agreement which was governed by California law.  Clause 7 of that agreement contained the following provision: "Any controversy, dispute or claim with regard to, arising out of, or relating to this Agreement, including but not limited to its scope or meaning, breach,...

Practice - Injunctions pending Appeal Evalve Inc v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd

Image
Author   Hellerhoff   Licence  CC BY-SA 3,0 Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Birss ) Evalve Inc and others v Edwards Lifesciences Lt d [2020] EWHC 1524 (Pat) (18 June 2020) In    Evalve Inc and others v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd #1 [ 2020] EWHC 514 (Pat) (12 March 2020)). Mr Justce Birss held that two patents that protected the market for a device known as the MitraClip were valid and infringed.   In  E valve Inc and others v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd (#2) [2020] EWHC 513 (Pat) (12 March 2020) Mr Justice Birss rejected the defendant's contention that it should be allowed to market its product notwithstanding the judgment on the ground that some patients were assisted by a product that competed with the MitraClip but not by the MitraClip itself. I blogged about those cases in   Patents - Evalve Inc. and Others v Edwards Lifesciences Ltd. #1   27 March 2020 NIPC Law and Patents - Evalve Inc. and Others v Edwa...

Copyright - Warner Music UK Ltd and Others v TuneIn Inc, - The Order

Image
Smartphones Author Senado Federal  Licence CC BY-SA 2.0   Source  Wikipedia Smartphone Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justice Birss)  Warner Music UK Ltd and another v Tunein Inc [2019] EWHC 3374 (Ch) (18 Dec 2019) The claimants, and the groups they represent, own or hold the exclusive licences to copyright in sound recordings of music. Together, they account for more than half the market for digital sales of recorded music in the UK and about 43% globally.   If a radio station wishes to play a record in the claimant's repertoire it needs a licence from the claimant which it can obtain directly from one of the claimants or indirectly from a collecting society. As most radio stations broadcast primarily to listeners who can receive their radio signals those licences tend to be restricted to the country in which they are located.  It is now possible for radio stations to broadcast over the internet. Some stations such a...