Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 MARCH 2021

Going Out With A Bang, What A Difference 2 Days Makes: Neurim V Mylan

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

Judgments of "Consequential Hearings" are often not interesting.

United KingdomIntellectual Property

Judgments of "Consequential Hearings" are often not interesting.  Not so the interesting tale of Neurim v Mylan [2021] EWHC 530 (Pat) (12 March 2021).  This is the case that went (almost) all the way to the Supreme Court as Neurim fought to obtain an interim injunction (the SC thought it was a point of law of general public importance, but did not grant permission because trial was imminent).  The saga continues...

In the UK Neurim won at trial (patent held valid and infringement was not contested) and so, given there was no interim injunction, they were keen to get to the consequential hearing and get their final order.  Mylan was not, particularly in the circumstances. Hindsight shows they were right, but at the time the judge, Mr Justice Marcus Smith, thought Neurim were due their final order. The final order hearing was held on 16 December 2020.

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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from