JUVE Patent has published its UK rankings for 2023 in which EIP’s litigation and filing practices are ranked. EIP’s Litigation practice is ranked four stars (out of five) with editorial commenting that the “IP boutique continues to be one of the most present litigation teams in the UK market when it comes to mobile communication and FRAND cases.” While also mentioning “EIP began to consolidate its crucial development in the life sciences sector.” The editorial mentions last year’s busy year with “PanOptis and its subsidiary Optis Cellular in a dispute against Apple.” Juve also notes the “enormous presence in SEP cases ensures EIP enjoys a solid position among the challengers of the market.” EIP’s presence in Europe is increasing as “EIP is currently one of the most expansive IP boutiques in Europe. After establishing a well-positioned litigation team in Germany years ago, EIP opened a prosecution practice in Stockholm in 2022.” While in autumn 2022 EIP partnered up with Paris-based litigation firm Amar Goussu Staub forming EIP Amar for the UPC. EIP Amar “now guarantees the firm access to Paris as a central UPC venue. EIP can assemble large, mixed teams for UPC cases. This is an advantage over some other British, German or French litigation boutiques, which have to rely on their best-friend firms.” Head of Litigation, Gary Moss is said to be a “terrific litigator with deep knowledge of FRAND matters.” In addition to EIP’s patent litigation ranking, the patent filing team is also recommended for Medical technology; Digital communication and computer technology; and Electronics. In addition, three partners are listed as recommended individuals: Darren Smyth for Chemistry / Digital communication and computer technology; and Jerome Spaargaren for Digital communication and computer technology / Electronics; and Monika Rai for Pharma and biotechnology who is noted as “one of the best EPO litigators in the sector”.

Today, 27 October 2022, judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal, London, in a successful appeal for EIP client Optis as part of its long-standing licensing dispute with Apple. The appeal involved the issue as to whether or not an implementer who had been found to infringe a valid UK SEP was obliged to undertake to enter into a FRAND licence determined by the Court, in order to avoid the court granting an injunction preventing further infringements by the implementer in the future. At first instance, Meade J held that it was so obliged. Apple appealed against this finding, but EIP client Optis was successful, and the appeal was dismissed by all judges. This decision is likely to prove another important decision in the FRAND landscape and is likely to be relied upon in subsequent cases. Gary Moss, Head of Litigation at EIP and lead on this case comments: “We are obviously pleased with the Court of Appeal’s judgment and find it to be a logical application of the Supreme Court’s guidance in Unwired Planet. It has endorsed the view we've always taken, which is that in return for taking the benefit of the SEP holder’s commitment to ETSI to grant FRAND licences, implementers should be obliged to accept the FRAND license that is determined by the court. That is the price they have to pay to avoid being subject to the normal relief for infringement of a valid patent, namely an injunction. It will be interesting to see what effect this decision will have on SEP holders and implementers, and the Courts, going forward and whether it changes their behaviours in any way.” The full judgment can be viewed here. The EIP team on the case was: Gary Moss, Angela Jack, Elizabeth McAuliffe, Owen Waugh, Steph Harris, India Badini, Jacqueline Long, and Emily Williams. Osbourne Clarke LLP were co-Counsel. The barristers acting for Optis were: Sarah Ford KC, Isabel Jamal, Emily MacKenzie and Jennifer Dixon.