Sign in
England and Wales Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

England and Wales Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

England and Wales decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Intellectual property law

No Climb Products Limited v Gas Safe Europe Limited

The court held that Gas Safe’s DetectaReach and replacement DetectaSmoke cans infringed claims 1, 8 and 9 of No Climb’s patent, which was also upheld as valid.

  • Patent infringement
  • Patent validity
  • Construction of patent claims
  • Indirect infringement
  • Prior art
  • Inventive step
Read case analysis
Intellectual property law [2026] EWHC 908 (IPEC)

No Climb Products Ltd v Gas Safe Europe Ltd

No Climb Products Ltd v Gas Safe Europe Ltd [2026] EWHC 908 (IPEC) (22 April 2026)

Patent trial on detector-testing apparatus: the court construed claim 1 broadly, found Gas Safe’s products infringed, and upheld validity over cited prior art.

  • Patent infringement
  • Patent validity
  • Construction of patent claims
  • Indirect infringement
  • Prior art
  • Inventive step
Read case analysis
Intellectual property

Jeff Gosling Limited v Autochair Limited

Claim 1 of the Patent requires both Adjustments 1 and 3 to be stepless; the Apex Assist hoist does not satisfy this requirement as Adjustment 3 is stepped. Indirect infringement fails because fitters would not intentionally implement the invention irresponsibly or contrary to instructions. The doctrine of equivalents does not apply as the Apex Assist does not achieve substantially the same result as the inventive concept.

  • Patent infringement
  • Claim construction
  • Doctrine of equivalents
  • Indirect infringement
Read case analysis
Intellectual property [2025] EWHC 1687 (IPEC)

Jeff Gosling Ltd v Autochair Ltd

Jeff Gosling Ltd v Autochair Ltd [2025] EWHC 1687 (IPEC) (08 July 2025)

The court held that JGL’s Apex Assist hoist did not infringe Autochair’s patent, granted a declaration of non-infringement, and dismissed the infringement counterclaim.

  • Patent infringement
  • Claim construction
  • Indirect infringement
  • Doctrine of equivalents
  • Patent-infringement
  • Claim-construction
Read case analysis
Intellectual property law [2025] EWHC 399 (IPEC)

Prevayl Innovations Ltd v Whoop Inc

Prevayl Innovations Ltd v Whoop Inc [2025] EWHC 399 (IPEC) (27 February 2025)

Patent dispute over a smart bra: the court held claims invalid for lack of inventive step, but would have found infringement by the bra and sensor module if valid.

  • Patent infringement
  • Patent validity
  • Inventive step
  • Indirect infringement
  • Patent-validity
  • Inventive-step
Read case analysis
Intellectual property

Prevayl Innovations Limited v Whoop Inc

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court held Prevayl’s patent for a biosignal-measuring bra invalid for lack of inventive step, and found Whoop’s products would have infringed if valid.

  • Patent infringement
  • Patent validity
  • Inventive step
  • Novelty
  • Indirect infringement
  • Patent-infringement
Read case analysis
Intellectual property

Akebia Therapeutics Inc v Fibrogen, Inc

Patent trial concerning HIF-PHI medicines for anaemia, with challenges to validity, amendment and infringement of FibroGen’s patent families.

  • Patent validity
  • Patent infringement
  • Obviousness
  • Insufficiency
  • Indirect infringement
  • Medical use claims
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

England and Wales decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.