In addition to the comprehensive patent services that we offer, our attorneys are also experienced in resolving disputes via litigation.
Our litigation team has extensive experience and many years of dealing with a broad range of patent cases before the UK (in the High Court, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) and the Court of Appeal), sometimes whilst managing parallel proceedings. Our patent litigation work covers a breadth of industries. Most recently we have conducted litigation in the UK courts in matters encompassing chemical and IT technologies.
Our strong and trusted client relationships ensure that our patent attorneys have an in depth understanding of our their businesses and technologies. This unparalleled understanding and technical expertise, combined with the specialist legal skills of our lawyers, means that we provide a dispute resolution team with the experience and resources to handle all elements of litigation.Â
The strength of our litigation team is demonstrated by our successful track record, and we pride ourselves in achieving practical and commercially driven results for our clients.
Regardless of the task, whether it be achieving a commercial result for our clients on the negotiating table or Â succeeding at trial, our team has the commercial acumen and skills Â to ensure that our clientsâ€™ interests are secured. We have particular experience of advising clients in patent disputes with multi-jurisdictional issues, especially throughout Europe, China and the US. We are accustomed to assessing the strategic advantages of where to commence proceedings so as to maximise the chances of a successful outcome for our clients.Â
We work with clients, balancing their commercial and strategic objectives, business requirements and cost implications, to establish a disputes strategy. Whilst this may involve formal proceedings, we are committed to using alternative dispute resolution (ADR), including informal negotiations and recognised ADR forms such as mediation and arbitration, wherever it seems most likely to lead to a better overall result for our clients. We have an excellent track-record of settling high-value patent disputes through this method.
Importantly, given the commercial and financial implications of litigation, we are committed to ensuring that any potential impacts of litigation are assessed within the overall litigation strategy. We will always use appropriate cost-effective and transparent strategies to meet our clientsâ€™ needs.
Our experience includes:
Our litigation team successfully defended established client British Gas Trading Ltd (â€śBritish Gasâ€ť) in a ÂŁ30 million patent infringement claim brought by claimants Meter-Tech and VanClare SE LLC (the â€śClaimantsâ€ť) vis-Ă -vis British Gas's past, current and proposed smart meter systems. The Claimants argued that their patent was inventive, however, our team constructed a robust case and successfully revoked the entire patent on which the claim was based. The case was of great commercial significance to our client, who trusted that our team possessed both the technical expertise and legal knowledge required to win a case of this magnitude. Not only was this case of particular importance to our client and our firm, but it also affected millions of energy consumers using smart meters, who would have faced increased costs had the Claimants been successful.
QinetiQ v GEOdynamicsÂ
Our litigation team defended GEODynamics, an oil industry-leading manufacturer of directional shaped charges. The case was brought in the High Court by QinetiQ, a UK-based defence technology company. It concerned a breach of contract claim relating to a patent licence, which involved the issue of patent infringement. GEODynamics were exclusive licensees of a patent portfolio owned by QinetiQ. Â The case involved complex technical and legal elements, and our litigation team presented a strong defence, drawing on the technical expertise of our patent attorney litigators as well as our legal knowledge and experience. Ultimately, in response to the outstanding case put forward by our litigation team, the parties were able to reach an agreement outside of court. We were successful in reaching a settlement agreement which had a significant positive commercial impact on our clientâ€™s business, and this case serves as an excellent example of our leading expertise and skill in dispute resolution.
Sony v PatelÂ
Our team defended our client in relation to an interim injunction application made by Sony in the High Court. The case concerned accusations by Sony that our client had copied their design for PlayStation controllers. Through hard-fought negotiations, our team managed to settle the dispute and achieve a positive result for our client, including avoiding an interim injunction. This case is a further example of our teamâ€™s expertise in settlement negotiations, and demonstrates our focus on vehemently defending our clients and seeking, above all, to achieve commercial results.
Semafone v EckohÂ
We were successful in securing favourable terms in a confidential settlement between Eckoh plc andÂ Semafone of their dispute over alleged infringement and invalidity of Semafoneâ€™s UK Patent relating to call centre technology, to the mutual benefit of both parties.
Memco (Avire) v StrackÂ
Our litigation team represented Memco, now Avire, in patent infringement proceedings in the IPEC . We were successful in reaching a settlement agreement with Strack, who had been producing a competing LED product, in which they took a licence under our clientâ€™s patent portfolio.Â