Hospira UK Ltd v Genentech, Inc [2014] EWHC 3248 (Pat) (22 July 2014)

Hospira UK Ltd v Genentech, Inc [2014] EWHC 3248 (Pat) (22 July 2014)

The court must start from the principle of open justice and require strong, specific reasons to maintain confidentiality over documents read or referred to in open court. Genentech provided sufficient justification for confidentiality only for the full clinical trial protocols (RCF-8 and RHE-10 pages 10-54) and the bulk of the biologics licence application (RHE-6 and 7 except page 14). For other documents (RHE-10 pages 1-9, RHE-4 and 5, and page 14 of RHE-6), the reasons for confidentiality were not made out, and open justice required disclosure.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 3248 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Hospira UK Limited; Defendant: Genentech, Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Application Under CPR 31.22 (confidentiality of Disclosed Documents) in Patent Litigation / Post Trial, Consequential Orders Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part and refused in part
Legal Topics
Confidentiality of Disclosed Documents, Patent Litigation, Open Justice, Use of Documents in Parallel Proceedings
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Confidentiality of Disclosed Documents Patent Litigation Open Justice Use of Documents in Parallel Proceedings

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hospira UK Limited

Claimant

Genentech, Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Under CPR 31.22 (confidentiality of Disclosed Documents) in Patent Litigation / Post Trial, Consequential Orders Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain documents disclosed in patent litigation should remain confidential after trial under CPR 31.22
  2. 2 Whether the interests of open justice outweigh the commercial confidentiality claimed by Genentech

Ratio Decidendi

The court must start from the principle of open justice and require strong, specific reasons to maintain confidentiality over documents read or referred to in open court. Genentech provided sufficient justification for confidentiality only for the full clinical trial protocols (RCF-8 and RHE-10 pages 10-54) and the bulk of the biologics licence application (RHE-6 and 7 except page 14). For other documents (RHE-10 pages 1-9, RHE-4 and 5, and page 14 of RHE-6), the reasons for confidentiality were not made out, and open justice required disclosure.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part and refused in part

Orders

  • RCF-8 and RHE-10 pages 10-54 to remain confidential.
  • RHE-6 and RHE-7 to remain confidential except for page 14, which is to be public.