Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) & Anor v Sandoz Ltd & Ors

Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) & Anor v Sandoz Ltd & Ors

The Defendants failed to demonstrate that the evidence they wish to adduce is properly characterised as expert evidence or that it is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings. The evidence sought is factual and can be provided by witnesses of fact without the need for expert evidence under CPR Part 35.

Parties
Claimant: Glaxo Wellcome UK Limited (T/A Allen & Hanburys); Claimant: Glaxo Group Limited; Defendant: Sandoz Limited; Defendant: Sandoz International GmbH; Defendant: Aeropharm GmbH; Defendant: Hexal AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property / Ruling on Application for Permission to Adduce Expert Evidence at Case Management Conference
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Trade Mark Infringement, Expert Evidence, Case Management, Prescription Medicines
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Passing Off Trade Mark Infringement Expert Evidence Case Management Prescription Medicines

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glaxo Wellcome UK Limited (T/A Allen & Hanburys)

Claimant

Glaxo Group Limited

Claimant

Sandoz Limited

Defendant

Sandoz International GmbH

Defendant

Aeropharm GmbH

Defendant

Hexal AG

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property / Ruling on Application for Permission to Adduce Expert Evidence at Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to adduce expert evidence in three identified areas: medical conditions treatable by inhalers, prescribing practices, dispensing practices

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants failed to demonstrate that the evidence they wish to adduce is properly characterised as expert evidence or that it is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings. The evidence sought is factual and can be provided by witnesses of fact without the need for expert evidence under CPR Part 35.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Defendants' application for permission to adduce expert evidence is refused.
  • Parties have permission to apply for expert evidence in future if limited expert evidence is shown to be likely to be of real assistance to the Court.