Proud to be limitless

No items found.
​
October 26, 2021
No items found.
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

Dear young Vanessa,

I know you’re about to undergo another operation, in fact I’ve lost count. You were born with a congenital deformity, despite having many surgeries, it’s a long- term condition but I want you to know things are going to be fine.

Your unseen disability does not define you! Your journey maybe longer than everyone else’s and you will have many setbacks, but you’re going to do well in life.

According to statistics, the odds are against you, a young black girl with a disability growing up in Hackney, but with your faith, family and friends to support you, you will surpass all expectations!

Let me tell you about your future…

Your journey will not be like the typical teen that leaves school goes to college and straight to university. It happens, but over a period of time. In fact you go to university as a mature student in your 30’s, but don’t be alarmed it was the right time in your life.

You will go through bouts of depression because of your disability and feel that you are not accepted by society, you will feel intimidated and suffer with low self-esteem, but with your determination, perseverance, and tenacity you will overcome many hurdles.

The turning point in your life will come when you read your medical notes “Vanessa has not accepted her condition” you will be angry and in denial, but the moment you accept your condition little do you know that your metamorphosis will begin.

You home in on your strengths and begin to believe in yourself, which will lead you to pursue a career in law. In 2013 you will complete a law degree and secure a job at EIP as a Patent Paralegal. Within this role you will be promoted twice within 3 years you will participate in the recruitment process, mentor new patent paralegals, lead projects and help to drive initiatives forward and you will travel across the world to represent EIP.

Who knew young Vanessa that this was possible or even achievable when you were laying on a hospital bed? My final piece of advice, set yourself no limits and be proud to be…you!

Written by Vanessa Johnrose, Executive Paralegal, EIP.

At EIP, we are committed to diversity and inclusion. We believe in equal opportunity in all areas and we are proud that diversity is a core part of our culture.

Recent Case Reports

See all Case Reports

UPC Court of appeal issues final decision, despite no finding on infringement at first instance
30 March 2026
In Rematec v Europe Forestry, the UPC Court of Appeal overturned the Mannheim Local Division’s revocation of the patent and, applying Article 75(1) UPCA, issued a final decision on both validity and infringement despite no infringement finding at first instance. The Court adopted a narrower, description‑led approach to claim interpretation, confirmed the patent’s validity, found infringement, and granted final remedies without referring the case back to the Court of First Instance.
​
Litigation insurance as security for costs
30 March 2026
In Syntorr v Arthrex, the UPC Court of Appeal clarified that while litigation insurance is not itself a form of security under Rule 158 RoP, it is a relevant factor when deciding whether security for costs should be ordered at all. By failing to consider the claimant’s insurance policy, the Munich Local Division wrongly exercised its discretion. The Court set aside the €2 million security order and confirmed that insurance can mitigate concerns about cost recoverability.
​
National law applies to claims for loss of profit if the events occurred before the UPC came into force
30 March 2026
In Fives v REEL, the Hamburg Local Division of the UPC dismissed a standalone damages action despite prior findings of infringement. Although the UPC was competent to assess damages, the court held that national law applied because the relevant events pre‑dated the UPC’s entry into force. Applying German law, the court found that the claimant had not proven causation or lost profit, highlighting the demanding evidentiary burden for price‑reduction damages claims and the importance of substantiating counterfactual tender outcomes.
​