Teva UK Ltd & Anor v Novartis AG [2022] EWHC 2366 (Pat) (19 September 2022)

Teva UK Ltd & Anor v Novartis AG [2022] EWHC 2366 (Pat) (19 September 2022)

Permission to amend is granted because, despite the lateness and some deficiencies, the amended claim is arguable, the area of law is developing, and the amendment does not threaten the trial date. The conduct of Novartis in withdrawing the UK designation late is a relevant factor. The court prefers to determine the facts at trial rather than strike out the claim at this stage.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2366 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: TEVA UK LIMITED; Claimant: TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED; Defendant (teva Action) / Claimant (novartis Action): NOVARTIS AG; Claimant (novartis Action): NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS UK LIMITED; Defendant (novartis Action): DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES (UK) LIMITED; Defendant (novartis Action): GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS EUROPE LIMITED; Defendant (novartis Action): TILLOMED LABORATORIES LIMITED; Defendant (novartis Action): ZENTIVA PHARMA UK LIMITED; Defendant (novartis Action): ARISTO PHARMA GMBH; Defendant (novartis Action): VIATRIS UK HEALTHCARE LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Patent Litigation / Application to Amend Pleadings / Interlocutory Application (permission to Amend Pleadings Before Trial)
Outcome
Permission to amend pleadings granted (subject to further particularisation and evidence).
Legal Topics
Arrow Declarations, Patent Litigation, Amendment of Pleadings, Discretionary Relief, Strike Out Applications, Jurisdiction and Forum Shopping
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Arrow Declarations Patent Litigation Amendment of Pleadings Discretionary Relief Strike Out Applications Jurisdiction and Forum Shopping

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TEVA UK LIMITED

Claimant

TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

Claimant

NOVARTIS AG

Defendant (teva Action) / Claimant (novartis Action)

NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS UK LIMITED

Claimant (novartis Action)

DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES (UK) LIMITED

Defendant (novartis Action)

GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS EUROPE LIMITED

Defendant (novartis Action)

TILLOMED LABORATORIES LIMITED

Defendant (novartis Action)

ZENTIVA PHARMA UK LIMITED

Defendant (novartis Action)

ARISTO PHARMA GMBH

Defendant (novartis Action)

VIATRIS UK HEALTHCARE LIMITED

Defendant (novartis Action)

Procedural Posture

Patent Litigation / Application to Amend Pleadings / Interlocutory Application (permission to Amend Pleadings Before Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Teva should be permitted to amend its pleadings to advance a new basis for Arrow declaratory relief close to trial
  2. 2 Whether the amended claim has a real prospect of success (strike out standard)
  3. 3 Whether the amendment would cause unfair prejudice or threaten the trial date

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend is granted because, despite the lateness and some deficiencies, the amended claim is arguable, the area of law is developing, and the amendment does not threaten the trial date. The conduct of Novartis in withdrawing the UK designation late is a relevant factor. The court prefers to determine the facts at trial rather than strike out the claim at this stage.

Court Disposition

Permission to amend pleadings granted (subject to further particularisation and evidence).

Orders

  • Teva is permitted to amend its pleadings as proposed, subject to further particularisation and evidential amendments by the specified deadline.
  • A two-day trial on discretionary issues only is directed; technical issues to be addressed only if Teva succeeds on discretion.