Newsroom

The Court of Appeal provided guidance on their approach to assessing added subject matter, highlighting that the technical effect underlying the invention and how the claimed and unclaimed features contribute thereto is central to the analysis.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that product-by-process features in a product claim limit the claim only where the specified process imparts characteristics that can be achieved solely by that process. It also clarified the law applicable to acts occurring before 1 June 2023, holding that UPC law may apply to ongoing infringement for injunctive relief, whereas damages for acts completed before that date are governed by national law, and that claims for provisional protection remain governed by national law.

The Court of Appeal held that where a “privileged order” under Rule 220(1)(c), such as an order relating to the production of evidence under Article 59 UPCA and Rule 190 RoP, is contained within a decision on the merits, a 15 day appeal deadline for that order applies, separate from the substantive appeal deadline. Appeals challenging such orders after that deadline are inadmissible, and parties cannot circumvent the appeal rules by re-filing substantially the same request in the appeal proceedings.

In T 0903/24, the EPO Board of Appeal relied on reference numerals to interpret disputed claim language, rejecting the patentee's narrower reading and revoking novelty over prior art D2 for the main request.

A High Court decision highlighting the consequences of inadequate disclosure searches under PD57AD and reaffirming that costs orders are final, even where later failures come to light.

The High Court’s judgment in Banham v Rogers provides a stark warning for SMEs defending intellectual property claims without professional advice. Acting as a litigant in person, the defendant misunderstood key technical issues, failed to comply with procedural requirements, and mismanaged correspondence and evidence. These cumulative errors left the court with no realistic defence to consider, leading to summary judgment and public reputational damage. The case underlines the importance of obtaining specialist IP advice at an early stage to avoid avoidable and compounding litigation risks.

EIP has retained its Tier 1 ranking in PATMA: Patents and its Tier 2 ranking in IP: Patents (contentious and non-contentious) in the Legal 500 UK 2027 guide. In addition, Gary Moss was inducted into the Hall of Fame in IP: Patents.

Christof Höhne, Darren Smyth, Heather McCann, James Seymour, and Sebastian Fuchs have all been named in this year's list, each recognised for their own approach to building patent value for clients.

EIP is delighted to announce that Stuart Malcolm has joined EIP as a Partner, Solicitor on 17 June 2026, strengthening our Commercial practice. Stuart brings more than 25 years of experience as a commercial and intellectual property lawyer, with a career spanning private practice, senior in-house leadership, and the United Kingdom's deep tech and innovation sectors.