Download now: LIFE SCIENCES WHITEPAPER - BUILDING AN INVESTABLE IP PORTFOLIO
​

Chambers UK 2021 recognises EIP’s expertise

No items found.
​
October 22, 2020
Additional information
Chevron icon
Info
Tags
Litigation
Digital
Table of contents
Chevron icon
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

EIP has been highly rated in the 2021 edition of Chambers & Partners UK.

Researchers highlighted EIP for its “excellent patent prosecution and oppositions practice” and its “highly capable trademark and designs offering” and notes the “much admired in-house patent litigation team”.

Sources comment: "They consistently make significant efforts to achieve desirable goals for the clients," while another praises the firm's "depth of knowledge."

The litigation team garners praise as "Their experience in FRAND issues is pretty much unrivalled."

Partners Jerome Spaargaren and Gary Moss received recommendations as notable practitioners.

Jerome "is a quick and deep thinker, and his ideas are full of originality."

Gary is a “very experienced litigator with a good feel for what is a good or bad point” and "is extremely bright and is always cognisant of achieving the objectives."

Further details on Chambers UK 2021 rankings can be viewed here.

Recent Case Reports

See all Case Reports

No language change at Central Division
08 October 2026
Proceedings before the UPC Central Division must be conducted in the language in which the patent was granted. There is no legal basis to change that language. In a revocation action concerning a German-language patent, the Paris Central Division rejected a request to switch the language of proceedings to English, and also rejected a subsidiary request to allow written submissions in English and hold the hearing in English, holding that Article 49(6) UPCA permits no derogation and reflects a deliberate legislative choice.
​
Criteria for obtaining an order to produce evidence under Rule 190
07 October 2026
This appeal judgment clarifies that Rule 190 orders to produce evidence require three cumulative conditions: specificity, necessity and proportionality, and cannot be used for fishing expeditions. The Court of Appeal confirmed that first instance judges enjoy a broad margin of discretion when assessing such requests, and upheld the order requiring production of two fabric samples for ballistic testing. Both the appeal and the cross-appeal were dismissed.
​
Court of Appeal focuses on the technical effect to determine added matter
30 September 2026
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.
​