Glaxo Group Ltd v Genentech Inc & Anor [2007] EWHC 1416 (Pat) (15 June 2007)

Glaxo Group Ltd v Genentech Inc & Anor [2007] EWHC 1416 (Pat) (15 June 2007)

There is a presumption in favour of a stay of UK revocation proceedings where parallel EPO opposition is ongoing, but this presumption is not strong and can be overcome if the balance of justice, particularly the risk and impact of delay, favours allowing the national proceedings to continue. In this case, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1416 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Glaxo Group Limited; Defendant: Genentech Inc; Defendant: Biogen Idec Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation and Stay Application / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending EPO Opposition
Outcome
Application for stay refused
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Forum Non Conveniens, Parallel Proceedings, Patent Validity, Opposition Proceedings, Revocation Actions
Intellectual Property Patents Civil Procedure Stay of Proceedings Forum Non Conveniens Parallel Proceedings Patent Validity Opposition Proceedings +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Glaxo Group Limited

Claimant

Genentech Inc

Defendant

Biogen Idec Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation and Stay Application / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending EPO Opposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UK revocation proceedings should be stayed pending EPO opposition outcome
  2. 2 Appropriate test for stay in patent cases with parallel EPO proceedings
  3. 3 Balance of justice between avoiding duplication and risk of delay/prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

There is a presumption in favour of a stay of UK revocation proceedings where parallel EPO opposition is ongoing, but this presumption is not strong and can be overcome if the balance of justice, particularly the risk and impact of delay, favours allowing the national proceedings to continue. In this case, the likely delay and commercial uncertainty to GSK outweigh the benefits of avoiding duplication, so the stay is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for stay refused

Orders

  • Proceedings to go to trial as scheduled
  • No stay of UK revocation proceedings pending EPO opposition