Actavis UK Ltd v Eli Lilly & Company

Actavis UK Ltd v Eli Lilly & Company

The Fourth and Fifth Actions do not constitute an abuse of process as the alleged abuse is contingent and cannot be established at this stage; Actavis are taking ordinary procedural steps to overcome obstacles raised by Lilly, and the existence of lis pendens is a natural consequence of properly constituted actions. A stay is not justified.

Parties
Claimant: Actavis UK Limited; Claimant: Actavis Group EHF; Claimant: Actavis Group PTC EHF; Claimant: Medis EHF; Claimant: Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG; Claimant: Medis Pharma GmbH; Claimant: Medis Pharma France SAS; Claimant: Actavis France SAS; Claimant: Actavis Spain S. A.; Claimant: Actavis Italy SPA A Socio Unico; Defendant: Eli Lilly & Company; Claimants' Instructing Solicitor: Bird & Bird LLP; Defendant's Instructing Solicitor: Hogan Lovells International LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Proceedings / Ruling on Stay Application and Costs
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed; costs awarded to Actavis.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Patent Litigation, Declaratory Relief, Jurisdiction, Lis Pendens, Foreign Law Procedural Requirements
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Abuse of Process Patent Litigation Declaratory Relief Jurisdiction Lis Pendens Foreign Law Procedural Requirements

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Actavis UK Limited

Claimant

Actavis Group EHF

Claimant

Actavis Group PTC EHF

Claimant

Medis EHF

Claimant

Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG

Claimant

Medis Pharma GmbH

Claimant

Medis Pharma France SAS

Claimant

Actavis France SAS

Claimant

Actavis Spain S. A.

Claimant

Actavis Italy SPA A Socio Unico

Claimant

Eli Lilly & Company

Defendant

Bird & Bird LLP

Claimants' Instructing Solicitor

Hogan Lovells International LLP

Defendant's Instructing Solicitor

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Proceedings / Ruling on Stay Application and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Fourth and Fifth Actions constitute an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether a stay should be granted pending resolution of the First and Third Actions
  3. 3 Whether procedural requirements under French and Spanish law have been circumvented

Ratio Decidendi

The Fourth and Fifth Actions do not constitute an abuse of process as the alleged abuse is contingent and cannot be established at this stage; Actavis are taking ordinary procedural steps to overcome obstacles raised by Lilly, and the existence of lis pendens is a natural consequence of properly constituted actions. A stay is not justified.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed; costs awarded to Actavis.

Orders

  • Lilly to pay costs of both applications; no indemnity basis for assessment.