Find a Barrister

Find an Arbitrator

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
people

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

18/07/2016

Rhodia v Molycorp

This is an archived article, and some links may not work. Contact us if you have any questions.

Rhodia v Molycorp – Press release

In Anan Kasei v Molycorp [2016] EWHC 1722, on 14 July 2016, Arnold J has handed down an interesting judgment in relation to the boundaries of the ECJ’s decision in GAT v LUK, and the scope of the court’s powers to assist proceedings in another EU member state. He needed to decide important questions on the scope of Article 24(4) of the Brussels I Recast and section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act.

Since GAT v LUK patent lawyers have assumed that if validity was challenged, all jurisdiction over infringement proceedings would be rejected in favour of the state of registration. However, Anan Kasei challenged this, arguing that if declaratory relief was sought relating only to non-validity aspects of infringement, GAT v LUK would not apply. Arnold J rejected this, holding that the “wide” interpretation given to Article 24(4) meant that such a claim would come within the concept of claims “concerned with” the validity of a patent.

In relation to relief sought in support of proceedings in another member state, Arnold J held that an application for sampling was an application for evidence. Consequently, it could not be granted under section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, because of the exclusion in section 25(7). Further, the wide power in section 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act could not be exercised so as to circumvent the restrictions in section 25(7).

Thomas Raphael QC of 20 Essex Street, together with Thomas Mitcheson QC and Miles Copeland, acted for Anan Kasei.


Share