Fujikura Ltd & Anor v Sterlite Technologies Ltd [2024] EWHC 2138 (Pat) (30 July 2024)

Fujikura Ltd & Anor v Sterlite Technologies Ltd [2024] EWHC 2138 (Pat) (30 July 2024)

The court held that the listing officer acted properly in accepting the defendant's stated unavailability of client representatives in July, that the Chancery Guide does not preclude consideration of client attendance, and that no clear or pressing reason was shown to interfere with the listing officer's decision. The application to bring the trial forward to July was dismissed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2138 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Fujikura Ltd; Claimant: Fujikura Europe Limited; Defendant: Sterlite Technologies Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation Action / Case Management Conference; Application to Alter Trial Listing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Litigation, Case Management, Trial Listing, Procedural Fairness
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Patent Litigation Case Management Trial Listing Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fujikura Ltd

Claimant

Fujikura Europe Limited

Claimant

Sterlite Technologies Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation Action / Case Management Conference; Application to Alter Trial Listing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial date should be brought forward from October to July 2025
  2. 2 Whether the listing officer erred in giving weight to the unavailability of defendant's client representatives in July
  3. 3 Whether the Chancery Guide precludes consideration of client attendance in trial listing

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the listing officer acted properly in accepting the defendant's stated unavailability of client representatives in July, that the Chancery Guide does not preclude consideration of client attendance, and that no clear or pressing reason was shown to interfere with the listing officer's decision. The application to bring the trial forward to July was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimants' application to bring trial forward to July refused
  • Costs awarded against claimants on the standard basis; indemnity costs refused