UK: Awards Of Damages In UK Patent Cases Will Prevail Notwithstanding The Findings Of EPO

Last Updated: 14 May 2007
Article by Nick Beckett

The Court of Appeal has ruled that where a UK patent is litigated upon for infringement and damages are payable this position is unaffected by a subsequent finding that the patent is invalid by the European Patent Office ("EPO"). Furthermore, the court refused to overturn the Patent County Courts ("PCC") refusal to order a stay in proceedings in anticipation of an imminent EPO ruling. The decision brings to the patentee greater certainty, firstly that the UK court will more likely make a ruling without waiting for the EPO, and secondly that the UK courts’ order for damages will not be overridden by a subsequent EPO ruling possibly a number of years in the future. There are also wider implications on the patentee’s choice of jurisdiction in which to bring a claim for infringement.

To view the article in full, please see below:

Full Article

The Court of Appeal has ruled that where a UK patent is litigated upon for infringement and damages are payable this position is unaffected by a subsequent finding that the patent is invalid by the European Patent Office ("EPO"). Furthermore, the court refused to overturn the Patent County Courts ("PCC") refusal to order a stay in proceedings in anticipation of an imminent EPO ruling. The decision brings to the patentee greater certainty, firstly that the UK court will more likely make a ruling without waiting for the EPO, and secondly that the UK courts’ order for damages will not be overridden by a subsequent EPO ruling possibly a number of years in the future. There are also wider implications on the patentee’s choice of jurisdiction in which to bring a claim for infringement.


Patents can be granted nationally by the National Patent Office or can be granted to take effect in a number of European jurisdictions by the EPO. After the EPO grants a patent, a nine-month period begins in which an applicant may challenge the patent and seek to have it revoked by the Opposition Division of the EPO. Whilst any such application for revocation must be received within the nine-month period, it may take several years for the notoriously slow EPO to come to a conclusion as to whether or not to invalidate the patent.

Infringement proceedings or an action to have a national patent revoked may be brought in the national courts as soon as the patent is granted. Proceedings in the UK courts are much quicker than in the EPO. Thus there can be a problem that the UK courts may find a patent valid and infringed, only for it to be later found invalid and removed from the register by the EPO. As a result, a question that frequently arises is whether a stay should be granted in litigation pending the outcome of opposition proceedings in respect of the patent that is the subject of an EPO opposition.

Although there was a trend towards a presumption of granting a stay (having the advantage of avoiding duplication of proceedings), this trend seems to have reversed of late – see for instance Baxter Healthcare v. Bayer Corporation, 2006, and an earlier decision in Unilin Beheer BV ("Unilin") v Berry Floor NV in May 2006. The court stated that a stay may leave the parties (particularly the defendant) in an uncertain position, and unable to go about their business for many years whilst the EPO reaches its decision. Accordingly the court will only grant a stay where the waste of costs in duplicate proceedings outweighs the uncertainty for the parties.


In this case, the patentee, Unilin, brought an infringement action in the PCC for infringement of a European Patent (UK) relating to floor panelling. The court found the patent to be valid in part, allowed an amendment and ruled that it had been infringed. Meanwhile, opposition proceedings were pending in the EPO.

The defendants applied to the PCC to stay the inquiry as to damages pending the outcome of the EPO opposition proceedings. In June 2006 Judge Fysh stated that "the disposal of patent litigation…. should not in my view be made to depend upon the barometer of opposition business at the EPO". He concluded that there was no compelling reason why the inquiry should not proceed. He also held that Unilin’s entitlement to damages was not res judicata.

The defendants were seeking to appeal the decision against a stay in proceedings as well as challenging Unilin’s entitlement to damages given the uncertainty as to the future outcome of the EPO’s decision on validity. There was some debate as to the question of supremacy as between the EPO and national courts, which was the "top" tribunal for validity.

However, Jacob LJ considered it meaningless to decide the question of whether the award of damages should survive on the basis of whether the national court or the EPO is "top" since it all depends on the circumstances. Where a national court holds a patent to be valid and the EPO then revokes it, the national patent is also revoked so the EPO is "top". However, where the EPO holds a patent valid, a national court may subsequently revoke it and in such circumstances the national court is "top".


  • The defendants were estopped from challenging Unilin’s entitlement to damages, whatever the ultimate results of the EPO. The principle of res judicata was not excluded by any statutory provision;
  • Even if there was no estoppel, past orders as to costs could not be challenged;
  • Whether or not there should be a stay of proceedings was only a matter in which the court would interfere if the previous judge were wrong in principle, of which there was no evidence and therefore the appeal for a stay of proceedings was dismissed.


Although the parties in the case settled the dispute shortly before judgment was delivered, other defendants in these circumstances are likely to feel aggrieved by the judgment. Jacob LJ observed: "Now a purist may say: it is nonsense, and moreover an unjust nonsense, for a man to have to pay for doing what, with hindsight, we know to have been lawful".

However, it was also noted that "there is a very very strong public interest in the finality of litigation" to ensure that "after a final decision businessmen should be able to get on with their business, knowing what the position is".

This decision, reversing the PCC decision and holding that an order for damages by a UK court for patent infringement will withstand a finding that the patent is invalid by the EPO, will have wide implications.

On the one hand a patentee will seek to bring infringement claims as early as possible and in jurisdictions where the procedure for doing so is quick and efficient in order to obtain a judgment before an unfavourable EPO ruling which could take several years. In the UK patent infringement actions can be dealt with promptly under a streamlined procedure in which cases may proceed to trial within six months and may reach appeal within 9 months from issue of proceedings. Such streamlined procedures may also be more cost effective than other processes. Jacob LJ had previously commented in Coflexip SA v Stolt Offshore MS Limited [2004], EWCA Civ 213 that "businessmen in this country know that they can use the rather speedy court system here to get a conclusion one way or another…one does not have to wait to find out who has won until the slowest horse in the race gets there".

On the other hand, defendants in light of this decision are more likely to seek a stay of national proceedings pending opposition procedures at the EPO. The disparity in the time it takes to hear cases in the UK compared to the EPO is further heightened by the Court of Appeal’s refusal to grant a stay. This decision follows a recent trend in which the UK Courts have frequently not been willing to stay UK proceedings in circumstances where the EPO was also considering validity of the patent. This has resulted in the UK courts and in particular the streamlined procedure being a more attractive route for patentee’s to pursue infringement proceedings.

The decision will result in even less uniformity across Europe than before, with a situation where a patent could be confirmed as valid in one country whilst held invalid in another, only to be later either upheld or revoked by the EPO where such subsequent decision may or may not affect previous national judgments as to damages for infringement. As Jacob LJ noted: "the untidy compromise inherent in the EPC…which cannot be properly resolved unless and until a rational patent litigation system for Europe is created". It is only once there is a centralised litigation system for European patents that uniformity and certainty in the status of centrally granted patents may be possible.

Case Citation

Unilin Beheer BV v Berry Floor NV Information Management Consultancy Limited (t/a Responsive Designs and/or Tapis UK) B&Q plc [2007] EWCA Civ 364.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 14/05/2007.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.