||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 74 (Jul)
|| EWHC 1533 (Pat)
||Chancery Division, Patents Court
||Martin Howe QC and Henry Ward (instructed by Charles Russell LLP) for the claimant.
||Alastair Wilson QC and Simon Malyniez (instructed by Edwin Coe LLP) for the first to fourth and sixth defendants.
||3 July 2009
Practice - Pre-trial or post-judgment relief - Injunction - Patent - Infringement - Defendant found to have infringed claimant's patent - Defendant seeking to raise issue of Crown use and alleged non-infringing device - Defendant seeking stay of post-judgment proceedings relating to relief - Whether stay should be granted.
Practice Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. Chancery Division, Patents Court: In proceedings where the defendant's had been found to have infringed the claimant's patent relating to a method of breaking through mobile telephone network security so that the identification numbers of a mobile telephone and its user could be obtained (see ), the defendant's application to stay post-judgment ancillary proceedings was dismissed as the defendants had not made out any case for a stay.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports