Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2009] All ER (D) 74 (Jul)
Neutral Citation: [2009] EWHC 1533 (Pat)
Court: Chancery Division, Patents Court
Judge:

Floyd J

Representation 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.
Judgment Dates: 3 July 2009

Catchwords

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.

The Case

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.

Practice Areas

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