Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corporation [2008] EWHC 819 (Pat) (17 April 2008)

Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corporation [2008] EWHC 819 (Pat) (17 April 2008)

RIM's costs were disproportionate to the issues at stake and should be assessed strictly for necessity and reasonableness. The percentage set-off approach was inappropriate due to the disparity in costs. RIM is entitled to 66% of its assessed costs, while Visto is entitled to 51% of its assessed costs on all three patents. No interim payment is ordered. RIM must pay Visto's costs on infringement, added matter, and insufficiency issues due to RIM's conduct.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 819 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant / Part 20 Defendant: Research In Motion UK Limited; Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: Visto Corporation; Part 20 Defendant: Research In Motion Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Patent Litigation (costs Judgment) / Post Trial, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders made: RIM to recover 66% of its assessed costs; RIM to pay Visto 51% of Visto's assessed costs; no interim payment ordered.
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Patent Infringement, Costs Orders, Proportionality in Costs, Issue Based Costs
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Patent Validity Patent Infringement Costs Orders Proportionality in Costs Issue Based Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Research In Motion UK Limited

Claimant / Part 20 Defendant

Visto Corporation

Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

Research In Motion Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Litigation (costs Judgment) / Post Trial, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What costs orders are appropriate following the outcome of the patent litigation between RIM and Visto?
  2. 2 Should proportionality affect the recoverable costs?
  3. 3 Should RIM pay Visto's costs on certain issues despite being the overall winner?

Ratio Decidendi

RIM's costs were disproportionate to the issues at stake and should be assessed strictly for necessity and reasonableness. The percentage set-off approach was inappropriate due to the disparity in costs. RIM is entitled to 66% of its assessed costs, while Visto is entitled to 51% of its assessed costs on all three patents. No interim payment is ordered. RIM must pay Visto's costs on infringement, added matter, and insufficiency issues due to RIM's conduct.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made: RIM to recover 66% of its assessed costs; RIM to pay Visto 51% of Visto's assessed costs; no interim payment ordered.

Orders

  • Visto to pay RIM 66% of RIM's total assessed costs on all three patents.
  • RIM to pay Visto 51% of Visto's total assessed costs expended on all three patents.