Illumina, Inc ("Illumina") & Ors v Illumina, Inc & Ors

Illumina, Inc ("Illumina") & Ors v Illumina, Inc & Ors

The application for an exception to the collateral purpose rule was refused because the disclosure was ordered at a preliminary stage solely to enable the defendant to plead its case, and permitting collateral use would undermine the policy objectives of the rule and encourage premature disclosure applications for collateral advantage.

Parties
Claimant: Illumina, Inc.; Claimant: Verinata Health Inc; Claimant: Sequenom Inc; Claimant: The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University; Claimant: The Chinese University of Hong Kong; Defendant: Premaitha Health PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Patent and Competition Law / Ruling on Disclosure Application Prior to Determination of Permission to Plead Non Technical Defences
Outcome
Application for exception to collateral purpose rule refused; costs awarded to claimants.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Confidentiality, Collateral Purpose Rule, Competition Law Defences, Patent Litigation
Intellectual Property Competition Law Civil Procedure Disclosure Confidentiality Collateral Purpose Rule Competition Law Defences Patent Litigation

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Illumina, Inc.

Claimant

Verinata Health Inc

Claimant

Sequenom Inc

Claimant

The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

Claimant

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Claimant

Premaitha Health PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent and Competition Law / Ruling on Disclosure Application Prior to Determination of Permission to Plead Non Technical Defences

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant may use confidential documents disclosed in litigation for submissions to the European Commission
  2. 2 Whether an exception to the collateral purpose rule should be granted at a preliminary stage

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an exception to the collateral purpose rule was refused because the disclosure was ordered at a preliminary stage solely to enable the defendant to plead its case, and permitting collateral use would undermine the policy objectives of the rule and encourage premature disclosure applications for collateral advantage.

Court Disposition

Application for exception to collateral purpose rule refused; costs awarded to claimants.

Orders

  • Defendant not permitted to use the unredacted PPA disclosed in these proceedings for submissions to the European Commission.
  • Claimants awarded costs of the dispute regarding the wording of the order, to be summarily assessed if not agreed.