Eli Lilly & Company Ltd. v Neopharma Ltd & Anor [2008] EWHC 415 (Ch) (06 March 2008)

Eli Lilly & Company Ltd. v Neopharma Ltd & Anor [2008] EWHC 415 (Ch) (06 March 2008)

The court has jurisdiction to order disclosure of customer names where there is an arguable case of wrongdoing, the order is necessary to enable action against ultimate wrongdoers, and the defendant is mixed up in the wrongdoing. The balance of convenience and risk of irreparable damage favours granting the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 415 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Eli Lilly and Company Limited; First Defendant: Neopharma Limited; Second Defendant: Neolab Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Interim Application for Disclosure in Patent Infringement Proceedings / Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome
Disclosure order granted in favour of Eli Lilly.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Disclosure Orders, Norwich Pharmacal Relief, Balance of Convenience, Interim Injunctions
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Patent Infringement Disclosure Orders Norwich Pharmacal Relief Balance of Convenience Interim Injunctions

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eli Lilly and Company Limited

Claimant

Neopharma Limited

First Defendant

Neolab Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application for Disclosure in Patent Infringement Proceedings / Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should order disclosure of customer names and supply details by Neolab to Eli Lilly in the context of alleged patent infringement
  2. 2 Whether the balance of convenience and risk of irreparable damage favours granting the disclosure order

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to order disclosure of customer names where there is an arguable case of wrongdoing, the order is necessary to enable action against ultimate wrongdoers, and the defendant is mixed up in the wrongdoing. The balance of convenience and risk of irreparable damage favours granting the disclosure order to Eli Lilly, given Neolab's lack of candour and the potential for substantial unquantifiable damage to Eli Lilly if further sales occur.

Court Disposition

Disclosure order granted in favour of Eli Lilly.

Orders

  • Neolab to disclose names and addresses of all persons supplied with Olanzapine Neopharma and any other products containing olanzapine, including dates and quantities of each supply.