Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 102 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2012] EWCA Civ 1234
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Lord Justice Moore-Bick, Lord Justice Lewison and Lord Justice Kitchin

Representation Roger Wyand QC, Richard Meade QC and Tom Mitcheson (instructed by Marks & Clerk Solicitors LLP) for MedImmune.
  Simon Thorley QC, Justin Turner QC and Joe Delaney (instructed by Allen & Overy LLP) for Novartis.
Judgment Dates: 10 October 2012

Catchwords

Patent - Validity - Novelty - Obviousness - Dispute arising between pharmaceutical companies regarding product used for treatment of ocular degeneration - Judge finding patent invalid for obviousness - Defendant appealing - Whether judge erring in findings - Whether judge entitled to make findings.

The Case

Patent Validity. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, considered an appeal from the Patents Court of the Chancery Division, concerning the alleged infringement by the defendant company of two patents in the manufacture of a product used for the treatment of macular degeneration of the eye. It held that the judge had not erred in determining the skilled team to whom the patent was addressed, or in assessing obviousness or phage display, and hence the appeal was dismissed.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.