Generics (UK) Ltd v Astrazeneca AB [2025] EWHC 2203 (Pat) (01 September 2025)

Generics (UK) Ltd v Astrazeneca AB [2025] EWHC 2203 (Pat) (01 September 2025)

The Claimants are the successful parties and entitled to their costs, subject to deductions for the distinct issue of classical obviousness (10%) and for specific applications and amendments (2% for Viatris, 0.8% for Teva, 1.2% for Glenmark). The deductions reflect unsuccessful or abandoned issues that increased costs, but not to the extent sought by AZ. Interim payments on account are set at 65% of costs after deductions. A confidentiality order under CPR 31.22 is granted as unopposed and appropriate.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2203 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Generics (U.K.) Limited; Claimant: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited; Claimant: Teva UK Limited; Claimant: Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Limited; Defendant: AstraZeneca AB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Patent Costs Judgment (post Trial) / Post Trial, Costs Determination After Appeal
Outcome
Claimants awarded costs with deductions; interim payments ordered; confidentiality order granted.
Legal Topics
Costs, Patent Validity, Specialist Procedure: Patents Court, Interim Payments, Disclosure, Pleading Amendments
Intellectual Property Patents Civil Procedure Costs Patent Validity Specialist Procedure: Patents Court Interim Payments Disclosure +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Generics (U.K.) Limited

Claimant

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited

Claimant

Teva UK Limited

Claimant

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Limited

Claimant

AstraZeneca AB

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Costs Judgment (post Trial) / Post Trial, Costs Determination After Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants should recover all or part of their costs as the successful parties
  2. 2 Whether deductions should be made for issues on which Claimants were unsuccessful or for specific applications/amendments
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum for interim payments on account of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimants are the successful parties and entitled to their costs, subject to deductions for the distinct issue of classical obviousness (10%) and for specific applications and amendments (2% for Viatris, 0.8% for Teva, 1.2% for Glenmark). The deductions reflect unsuccessful or abandoned issues that increased costs, but not to the extent sought by AZ. Interim payments on account are set at 65% of costs after deductions. A confidentiality order under CPR 31.22 is granted as unopposed and appropriate.

Court Disposition

Claimants awarded costs with deductions; interim payments ordered; confidentiality order granted.

Orders

  • 10% deduction from each Claimant's costs for classical obviousness issue.
  • Additional deductions: 2% from Viatris, 0.8% from Teva, 1.2% from Glenmark for trial listing applications and pleading amendments.