England and Wales Case Law

Kohler Mira Limited v Norcros Group (Holdings) Limited

The patent claims are invalid for insufficiency due to uncertainty; the specification does not provide a criterion for 'substantially unchanged' flow rate, making the boundary of the claim impossible to determine. Triton's products do not infringe as the result is achieved by other components, not the diverter valve, and the risk of scalding criterion is not the applicable test.

Source excerpt

• Patent infringement
• Patent validity
• Claim construction
• Insufficiency
• Uncertainty

Read case analysis

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd & Anor v ZTE Corporation & Ors

High Court patents judgment on Samsung’s 5G patent. The court addressed skilled person, inventive step, collocation, and plausibility arguments over an NR initial-access claim.

• Inventive step
• Collocation
• Technical effect
• Plausibility
• Claim construction
• Standard essential patents

Read case analysis

Laboratorios Leon Farma SA v Comptroller-General of Patents

Laboratorios Leon Farma SA v Comptroller-General of Patents [2026] EWHC 663 (Ch) (20 March 2026)

The High Court dismissed an appeal over an SPC for drospirenone, holding that earlier combination-product authorisations counted for Article 3(d).

• Supplementary protection certificates
• Spc regulation article 3
• Marketing authorisation
• Interpretation of 'product' under spc regulation
• Binding effect of cjeu jurisprudence
• Supplementary-protection-certificate

Read case analysis

Amazon.com Inc & Ors v Interdigital VC Holdings Inc & Ors

Amazon.com Inc & Ors v Interdigital VC Holdings Inc & Ors [2026] EWHC 499 (Pat) (05 March 2026)

The Patents Court allowed Amazon to make a declaration required by the UPC Local Division, declined any order against InterDigital, and let the RAND trial proceed without UPC-territory damages.

• Anti-suit injunctions
• Frand licensing
• Standard essential patents (seps)
• Jurisdictional conflicts
• Comity
• Case management

Read case analysis

Salts Healthcare Limited v Pelican Healthcare Limited

The claims require weld portions that extend away from the periphery and downwardly towards the bottom of the appliance; Pelican's ModaVi bags do not meet this requirement as their weld portions extend upwardly. The doctrine of equivalents does not extend protection to the variant because the claim structure and specification indicate strict compliance is required. Claim 8 as granted is novel over Grum-Schwensen as the prior art does not clearly and unambiguously disclose the required weld portion configuration when the outlet is folded. Pre-transfer costs should be limited to IPEC scale in t…

Source excerpt

• Patent infringement
• Patent validity
• Doctrine of equivalents
• Claim construction
• Novelty
• Costs (ipec and high court)

Read case analysis

Salts Healthcare Ltd v Pelican Healthcare Ltd

Salts Healthcare Ltd v Pelican Healthcare Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 93 (19 February 2026)

Court of Appeal considered patent claim construction, equivalence, novelty and pre-transfer costs in an ostomy appliance dispute between Salts and Pelican.

• Patent infringement
• Claim construction
• Doctrine of equivalents
• Novelty
• Ostomy appliances
• Patent-infringement

Read case analysis

Parsons v Convatec Ltd

Parsons v Convatec Ltd [2026] EWHC 325 (Pat) (16 February 2026)

The Patents Court held that Convatec Ltd infringed Parsons’ patent, upheld the patent’s validity, granted an injunction, ordered damages to be assessed, and awarded costs.

• Patent infringement
• Validity of patent
• Injunctions
• Patent-infringement
• Patent-validity

Read case analysis

Emotional Perception AI Limited v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks

The UK Supreme Court held that the Aerotel approach to EPC Article 52 should no longer be followed, and remitted an AI patent application to the UKIPO.

• Patentability of artificial intelligence
• Computer-implemented inventions
• Interpretation of epc article 52
• Exclusion of computer programs from patentability
• Ai-patentability
• Computer-implemented-inventions

Read case analysis

Merck Sharp & Dohme (UK) Ltd v Halozyme Inc

Merck Sharp & Dohme (UK) Ltd v Halozyme Inc [2026] EWHC 121 (Pat) (21 January 2026)

The court held Halozyme’s amended infringement statement was too sparse and ordered a compliant version. MSD was also ordered to use best endeavours to provide an Alt-B4 sample.

• Patent infringement
• Patent revocation
• Pleading requirements
• Provision of samples
• Case management
• Patent-infringement

Read case analysis

Warner Bros. Discovery Inc & Ors v Nokia Corporation & Anor

Warner Bros. Discovery Inc & Ors v Nokia Corporation & Anor [2026] EWHC 103 (Pat) (15 January 2026)

The Patents Court expedited trial of RAND issues in parallel FRAND disputes, citing foreign injunction risk and the need for commercial certainty.

• Expedition of trial
• Frand/rand obligations
• Injunction risk
• Case management
• Disclosure
• Frand

Read case analysis