Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 JULY 2015

Bifurcation In The UK Courts?

Marks & Clerk
Marks & Clerk
Contributor
Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk LLP was founded in 1887 by George Croydon Marks, who was joined in partnership by...

View firm profile
Explore more from Marks & Clerk

The usual course in the UK is for patent infringement and validity proceedings to be heard together. Often one is a counterclaim to the other.

United KingdomIntellectual Property

The usual course in the UK is for patent infringement and validity proceedings to be heard together. Often one is a counterclaim to the other. However, sometimes the relevant parties to each claim are different and there may be reasons to proceed with validity and infringement separately. British Gas Services Ltd v VanClare SE LLC (17 June 2015; extempore; unreported) is a case where the flexibility of the UK courts was tested.

British Gas brought patent revocation proceedings in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) against VanClare's patent relating to "Smart Meters". Prior to any defence (or counterclaim) by VanClare, separate infringement proceedings were started in the High Court against British Gas. These proceedings were by a separate entity (an exclusive licensee) controlled by the same person as VanClare. VanClare then applied for the IPEC revocation proceedings to be transferred to the High Court to be heard alongside the infringement proceedings.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from