Generics (UK) Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S Rev 1 [2006] EWCA Civ 1261 (02 August 2006)

Generics (UK) Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S Rev 1 [2006] EWCA Civ 1261 (02 August 2006)

The presumption under s.100(1) of the Patents Act 1977 was rebutted by compelling evidence that X's process was not covered by claim 6, and there was no reasonable prospect of success for the process claim. X's provision of information to regulatory authorities did not amount to joint tortfeasorship, as there was no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 1261
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Generics (UK) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: H Lundbeck A/S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division, Patents Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Process Claims, Product Claims, Joint Tortfeasorship, Presumption Under Patents Act 1977 S.100(1), Service Out of Jurisdiction
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Process Claims Product Claims Joint Tortfeasorship Presumption Under Patents Act 1977 S.100(1) Service Out of Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Generics (UK) Ltd

Claimant/respondent

H Lundbeck A/S

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division, Patents Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success for a claim of infringement of process claim 6 against Generics
  2. 2 Whether there is an arguable case for joint tortfeasorship against X (the Indian supplier) justifying service out of jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The presumption under s.100(1) of the Patents Act 1977 was rebutted by compelling evidence that X's process was not covered by claim 6, and there was no reasonable prospect of success for the process claim. X's provision of information to regulatory authorities did not amount to joint tortfeasorship, as there was no common design or concerted action with Generics to infringe the patent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.