England and Wales Case Law

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

The English court has jurisdiction over Amazon's RAND and competition claims because, properly characterised, they relate to UK patents and markets; service under CPR r.63.14 and permission to serve out were valid; InterDigital's undertakings and arbitration offer do not provide a licence or certainty and do not remove the UK jurisdictional hook; no alternative forum is clearly or distinctly more appropriate; and a forum non conveniens or case management stay is refused.

Source excerpt

• Patents
• Standard essential patents (seps)
• Rand/frand licensing
• Jurisdiction
• Forum non conveniens
• Service of process

Read case analysis

David Parsons v Convatec Limited

The court approved costs budgets for both parties, applying principles of reasonableness and proportionality, making targeted reductions to Defendant's budget where luxury or excessive rates were identified, and adjusting Claimant's disclosure budget to reflect the less exacting nature of his disclosure exercise.

Source excerpt

• Patents
• Costs management
• Costs budgeting
• Section 40 patents act 1977

Read case analysis

Parsons v Convatec Ltd

Parsons v Convatec Ltd [2026] EWHC 300 (Pat) (30 January 2026)

Costs budgeting decision in a complex patent compensation claim, with the court reducing several of the Defendant’s phase budgets and approving the Claimant’s disclosure budget.

• Patents
• Employee compensation for inventions
• Costs budgeting
• Reasonableness and proportionality of costs
• Costs-budgeting
• Patents-act-1977

Read case analysis

Stephen Thaler v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks

The High Court refused Dr Thaler permission to appeal in a patents case, finding no real prospect of success on challenges to s.13(2), Form 7, and inventorship points.

• Patent application procedure
• Statutory interpretation
• Human rights in property
• Inventorship
• Judicial review
• Patent-application-procedure

Read case analysis

Astrazeneca AB & Anor v Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Limited

Both sides face irreparable harm if the injunction is granted or refused; uncertainties exist in quantifying damages for either party. The status quo, as defined by who is currently on the market, should be preserved pending the imminent appeal. An interim injunction restraining all respondents from marketing generic dapagliflozin is appropriate.

Source excerpt

• Patents
• Supplementary protection certificates
• Interim injunctions
• Generic pharmaceuticals
• Market entry
• Pricing schemes

Read case analysis

Sandoz AG & Ors v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH & Ors

Sandoz AG & Ors v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH & Ors [2025] EWHC 2533 (Pat) (07 October 2025)

The Patents Court refused Sandoz permission to amend pleadings in its damages inquiry and granted Bayer’s strike-out/summary judgment application on a reply pleading.

• Assessment of damages
• Liberal assessment principle
• Interim injunctions
• Pleading amendments
• Evidential presumptions
• Patents

Read case analysis

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Alvotech Hf & Anor

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Alvotech Hf & Anor [2025] EWHC 2623 (Pat) (29 September 2025)

The Patents Court granted an expedited trial in patent litigation, listing it for 3 November 2025 over two days amid proportionality and delay issues.

• Expedition of trial
• Injunctions
• Proportionality
• Delay
• Patents
• Trial-expedition

Read case analysis

AstraZeneca AB & Anor v Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd & Ors

AstraZeneca AB & Anor v Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 2406 (Pat) (16 September 2025)

The Patents Court decided costs after AstraZeneca’s interim injunction applications in the dapagliflozin litigation, awarding costs largely to the generic companies and indemnity costs against Sandoz and Bestway.

• Costs of interim injunctions
• Costs following the event
• Balance of convenience
• Interim relief
• Patent validity
• Indemnity costs

Read case analysis

Sandoz AG & Ors v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH & Ors

Sandoz AG & Ors v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH & Ors [2025] EWHC 2201 (Pat) (01 September 2025)

The Patents Court struck out Sandoz’s claim for an account of profits under Bayer’s cross-undertakings, holding the remedy was limited to compensation for loss.

• Cross-undertaking in damages
• Account of profits
• Compensatory damages
• Interim injunctions
• Patent invalidity
• Remedies for wrongful injunction

Read case analysis

MediaTek, Inc & Ors v Huawei Technologies Co, Ltd & Anor

MediaTek, Inc & Ors v Huawei Technologies Co, Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 1857 (Pat) (17 July 2025)

At a patent case management hearing, the court ordered limited disclosure of Huawei’s infrastructure licences and required MediaTek to seek patent-pool essentiality assessments.

• Disclosure
• Standard essential patents (seps)
• Licensing
• Patent pools
• Infringement acts
• Patents

Read case analysis