Schering Corporation v Cipla Ltd & Anor

Schering Corporation v Cipla Ltd & Anor

The letter of 6 July 2004 was a negotiating document, marked 'without prejudice', expressing willingness to seek a commercial solution and inviting negotiation; therefore, it is privileged and cannot be relied upon in infringement proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: Schering Corporation; Defendant: Cipla Limited; Defendant: Neolab Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement / Application to Strike Out Proceedings
Outcome
claim struck out
Legal Topics
Without Prejudice Privilege, Patent Infringement, Negotiation Privilege
Intellectual Property Patents Without Prejudice Privilege Patent Infringement Negotiation Privilege

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Schering Corporation

Claimant

Cipla Limited

Defendant

Neolab Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement / Application to Strike Out Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the letter dated 6 July 2004 from Cipla to Schering is privileged as 'without prejudice' and thus inadmissible in patent infringement proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The letter of 6 July 2004 was a negotiating document, marked 'without prejudice', expressing willingness to seek a commercial solution and inviting negotiation; therefore, it is privileged and cannot be relied upon in infringement proceedings.

Court Disposition

claim struck out

Orders

  • Schering is not entitled to refer to the Cipla letter in its particulars of infringement.
  • The action is struck out.