Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation [2017] EWHC 2880 (Pat) (10 November 2017)

Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation [2017] EWHC 2880 (Pat) (10 November 2017)

The application for interim injunction fails because the appeal to the Supreme Court has no realistic prospect of success; the Court of Appeal applied settled law to the facts, and any loss to Lilly from generic entry is quantifiable and compensable in damages.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2880 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Actavis Group PTC EHF; Fourth Party/appellant: Actavis UK Limited; Claimant/appellant: Teva UK Limited; Claimant/appellant: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited; Claimant/appellant: Generics (UK) Limited (t/a Mylan); Defendant/respondent: ICOS Corporation; Third Party: Eli Lilly and Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application in Patent Litigation / Post Trial, Pending Supreme Court Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Interim injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Obviousness, Pharmaceutical Patents, Balance of Convenience, Damages
Intellectual Property Patents Interim Injunctions Obviousness Pharmaceutical Patents Balance of Convenience Damages

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Actavis Group PTC EHF

Claimant/appellant

Actavis UK Limited

Fourth Party/appellant

Teva UK Limited

Claimant/appellant

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited

Claimant/appellant

Generics (UK) Limited (t/a Mylan)

Claimant/appellant

ICOS Corporation

Defendant/respondent

Eli Lilly and Company

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application in Patent Litigation / Post Trial, Pending Supreme Court Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant interim injunctive relief pending Supreme Court appeal in light of patent invalidity finding
  2. 2 Whether the appeal has a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether damages are an adequate remedy for either party

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interim injunction fails because the appeal to the Supreme Court has no realistic prospect of success; the Court of Appeal applied settled law to the facts, and any loss to Lilly from generic entry is quantifiable and compensable in damages.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction refused

Orders

  • Application for interim injunction dismissed