Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group PTC EHF & Ors

Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group PTC EHF & Ors

The Amended Particulars of Infringement do not disclose reasonable grounds for alleging subjective intention on the part of Actavis. However, given that this is a developing area of law and the possibility that the judge's construction of the mental element may be wrong, it would not be correct to strike out or summarily dismiss Warner-Lambert's claim. The proper course is to establish the facts at trial before determining the law definitively.

Parties
Claimant: Warner-Lambert Company, LLC; Defendant: Actavis Group PTC EHF; Defendant: Actavis UK Limited; Defendant: Caduceus Pharma Limited; Proposed Defendant: Highland Health Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement / Application to Strike Out Claim and Application to Amend Particulars of Infringement
Outcome
Application to strike out or summarily dismiss the claim refused; permission to amend particulars of infringement granted with exceptions.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Second Medical Use Patents, Swiss Form Claims, Summary Judgment, Pleading Amendments
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Second Medical Use Patents Swiss Form Claims Summary Judgment Pleading Amendments

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Warner-Lambert Company, LLC

Claimant

Actavis Group PTC EHF

Defendant

Actavis UK Limited

Defendant

Caduceus Pharma Limited

Defendant

Highland Health Board

Proposed Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement / Application to Strike Out Claim and Application to Amend Particulars of Infringement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Amended Particulars of Infringement disclose reasonable grounds for alleging subjective intention on the part of Actavis
  2. 2 Whether Warner-Lambert's claim should be struck out or summarily dismissed
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'for treating' in Swiss form claims and the requisite mental element

Ratio Decidendi

The Amended Particulars of Infringement do not disclose reasonable grounds for alleging subjective intention on the part of Actavis. However, given that this is a developing area of law and the possibility that the judge's construction of the mental element may be wrong, it would not be correct to strike out or summarily dismiss Warner-Lambert's claim. The proper course is to establish the facts at trial before determining the law definitively.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out or summarily dismiss the claim refused; permission to amend particulars of infringement granted with exceptions.

Orders

  • Warner-Lambert granted permission to amend Particulars of Infringement, except references to France in sub-paragraphs 4(d) and (e7) refused.
  • Claim not struck out or summarily dismissed; to proceed to trial.