UK: The Basics Of Patent Law - Procedure, Trial, Appeal And Settlement

Gowling WLG's intellectual property experts discuss litigation procedure, trial, appeal and settlement, as part of their 'The basics of patent law' series.

This article is part of a series called 'The basics of patent law', covering: Types of intellectual property protection for inventions and granting procedure; Initiating proceedings; Infringement and related actions; Revocation actions, non-infringement and clearing the way; Procedure, trial, appeal and settlement; Remedies and costs; Assignment and licensing; and the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent system.

The articles underpin Gowling WLG's contribution to Chambers' Global Practice Guide on Patent Litigation 2017, for which Gordon Harris and Ailsa Carter wrote the UK chapter.

Court procedure and trial structure

The conduct of civil litigation in England and Wales is governed by the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). The CPR covers all stages of litigation from pre-action correspondence to the award and payment of a final costs order (although proceedings in the UK Supreme Court are governed by the Rules of the Supreme Court).

Some parts of the CPR apply to particular types of dispute only. For example, in respect of disputes regarding patents, Part 63 supplements and amends many of the general rules. In addition, for some of the general rules of procedure, their specific application in respect of patent disputes has been developed by the case law of the Patents Court and the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC). (For discussion of choice of courts in patent proceedings, please see our article on Initiating proceedings).

The legal system in England and Wales is traditionally geared to the hearing of disputes in a single substantive oral trial, although multi-patent disputes may be heard as a series of single patent trials, and it is also usual for a trial to be 'split' into liability and quantum stages. Usually, procedural stages regarding quantum only begin after a finding of liability has been reached.

At an early stage in the litigation, case management directions are set (if not agreed) defining the applicable pre-trial procedural stages and deadlines for the parties, in view of the nature of the dispute. For the liability stage, these commonly begin with the completion of the exchange of statements of case and may include, for example, directions regarding any of the following:

  • budgets
  • admissions
  • security for legal costs
  • disclosure (and inspection)
  • product or process description (an alternative to disclosure)
  • experiments
  • notice of models
  • technical primer
  • written fact evidence in chief
  • written expert evidence in chief
  • pre-trial review
  • trial bundles
  • the hearing of the trial, and
  • costs.

In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding procedure or interim relief, upon the application of a party, the court may set an interim procedure for resolving the dispute. This may occur, for example, if one party seeks an interim injunction, or if a dispute arises as to a party's compliance with the directions set by the court.

The procedure employed in the IPEC tends to be more streamlined than that employed in the Patents Court (or the Chancery Division of the High Court more generally). For example:

  • the court will manage out aspects of a case which are considered weak;
  • there is modification to the conventional separation of legal pleas, assertion of fact and evidence;
  • the number of permitted witnesses and experts is generally fewer; and
  • the trial is limited to two days in length.

In the Patents Court (and Chancery Division more generally), an evaluation of an optional Shorter Trial Scheme (STS) is taking place, available for claims commenced before 1 October 2018. The STS is intended to provide a 'streamlined procedure' leading to judgment within a year of proceedings being issued. There is overlap with the types of modification to High Court procedure that are commonly seen in the IPEC procedure; however the caps on monetary relief and recovery of costs applicable in the IPEC do not apply to cases in the STS.

The trial of a claim under the Patents Act or for breach of confidence is heard and determined at first instance by a judge.

In England and Wales, judges are appointed from among the most senior advocates in the relevant field. The judges in the Patents Court and IPEC are specialists in intellectual property matters, although some have more technical experience than others. Cases in the Patents Court are allocated a level of technical complexity (levels 1-5), and the most complex cases are then listed by the court for trial by a more technically experienced judge. Occasionally a technical teach-in for the judge, from an expert in the relevant field, will be ordered. More commonly, the parties are ordered to prepare an agreed 'primer' on the (undisputed) background technology. Almost always, the parties rely on the evidence of expert witnesses in respect of the technical points in dispute. Pursuant to the CPR, the duty of the experts is to the Court, even when they are instructed by only one party to the litigation (which is usual). In English patent proceedings the evidence of the experts is usually key to the outcome at trial. In other words, the party whose expert evidence the judge prefers will often win the case.

At the hearing of the trial, the usual structure is that the claimant makes an opening statement, the parties cross-examine the witnesses (both the fact witnesses and the experts) relied upon by each other, and then each party makes a closing statement. The judge considers and rules upon the factual and technical points of dispute in view of the evidence (including cross-examination); and upon the legal points of dispute in view of the written and oral submissions of the parties' advocates.

The time to trial has tended to depend upon the conduct of the parties, the complexity of the case and the diary of the court. A case may be expected to reach first instance trial on liability within 4-15 months, with the reasoned judgment following the completion of the hearing. A second instance decision may be returned within approximately 2-20 months of the first instance decision. The fastest procedures tend to occur in cases where the patentee has sought interim injunctive relief but the court considers that the better course is to order a fast procedure.

Procedural mechanisms are available for preserving confidentiality in documents and material made available to the other party (and the court) in the course of litigation.

Mechanisms to obtain evidence and information

In appropriate circumstances, the court will award any of a number of measures for obtaining and/or preserving evidence, including search and seizure, provision of information and disclosure, as discussed briefly in our article on Initiating proceedings.

A party discloses a document by stating that it exists. The party to whom disclosure is made is then entitled to inspect the document, except where it is no longer in the disclosing party's control or where the disclosing party has a right or duty to withhold inspection of it, for example because it is privileged. Confidentiality does not confer a right to withhold inspection, but the court may order disclosure of confidential documents on appropriate terms, for example to specified members of a 'confidentiality club'. The existence of a confidentiality club will reduce the likelihood that redaction of documents will be allowed (Aqua Global Solutions v. Fiserv [2016] EWHC 1627 (Ch)).

In 2016, in Positec v Husqvarna [2016] EWHC 1061 (Pat), the Patents Court ruled that, following changes to the Civil Procedure Rules, there is no longer a prima facie rule that standard disclosure be given. Absent a "smoking gun" or a more sophisticated type of argument (such as the patentee relying upon commercial success or the reaction of others to the invention), the Patents Court will be disinclined to give standard disclosure (or any disclosure) in a straightforward obviousness dispute.

Standard disclosure, where it is given, generally requires a party to disclose only the documents on which he or she relies and the documents that adversely affect his or her own case, adversely affect another party's case or support another party's case. In patent cases however, standard disclosure is usually more limited than this: provision of a product or process description by the alleged infringer usually enables standard disclosure to be dispensed with in relation to infringement; regarding validity, standard disclosure is usually constrained to a term two years either side of the earliest claimed priority date. In every case, it is the court that orders the scope of any disclosure.

Where disclosure is ordered, it usually takes place in the course of the proceedings before the exchange of written evidence, but it can be ordered at any time in appropriate circumstances, including before litigation has commenced. Following a finding of infringement or breach of confidence in a case in which a claim for damages or account of profits is made, the court will usually order, at the successful party's election, disclosure relating to the defendant's sales, in order to assist the making of an informed choice.


An appeal from a decision (interlocutory or final) of the Comptroller (i.e. proceedings in the UK Intellectual Property Office) lies, as of right, to the Patents Court (PA s.97).

Interim decisions of the IPEC are appealable to the Patents Court. Final decisions of the IPEC, and interlocutory and final decisions of the Patents Court, are appealable to the Court of Appeal, but the permission of the first instance court, or the Court of Appeal, is necessary. Permission is given if the court considers that the appeal has a real prospect of success or if there is some other compelling reason why it should be heard. Generally, new evidence is not admissible at the appeal stage.

Decisions of the Court of Appeal relating to important issues of legal principle are appealable to the Supreme Court; again, the permission of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court is necessary.

Settlement of litigation

Beyond the Pre-Action Protocol (discussed in our article on Initiating proceedings), there is no mandatory or formal mechanism for settling litigation. The parties are free to settle their dispute at any time, but should be alert to compliance with all aspects of the law, for example anti-trust law.

If settlement is reached after the substantive trial hearing but before the judgment is handed down, judgment will not usually be handed down. However, the court may do so should it consider the circumstances such as to warrant it, for example where the case raises a point which it is in the public interest to ventilate in a judgment (Barclays v Nylon [2011] EWCA Civ 826; see for example Electromagnetic Geoservices v Petroleum Geo-Services [2016] EWHC 881 (Pat)). On settlement it is usual, but not mandatory, for the proceedings to be stayed rather than dismissed, on the basis that if the settlement agreement is breached the proceedings can be revived.

Concurrent proceedings and stay

After the grant of a European patent, the possibility of concurrent proceedings in the EPO and the UK court contesting the validity of the UK designation of a European patent is inherent in the system established by the European Patent Convention (EPC). However, national courts exercise exclusive jurisdiction on infringement issues.

The Court of Appeal has indicated that if there are no other factors, where concurrent proceedings arise a stay of the national proceedings is the "default" option, there being no purpose in pursuing two sets of proceedings simply because the EPC allows for it (IPCom v HTC [2013] EWCA Civ 1496). It is for the party resisting the grant of the stay to show why it should not be granted, but ultimately it is a question of where the balance of justice lies.

For example, if allowing the national court to proceed might allow the patentee to obtain monetary compensation which is not repayable if the patent is subsequently revoked, this would be a factor in favour of the grant of a stay. It may, however, be possible to mitigate the effect of this factor by the offer of a suitable undertaking to repay. If commercial certainty would be achieved in the UK at a considerably earlier date in the case of the UK proceedings than in the EPO, as will often be the case when a defendant initiates opposition proceedings at the EPO following receipt of an infringement claim in the UK, this would be a factor against the grant of a stay; the relative timings of the two sets of proceedings will be relevant.

In practice, the nature of any undertakings offered by the party resisting the stay may be decisive in the court's decision as to where the balance lies. For example, in Actavis v Pharmacia [2014] EWHC 2265 (Pat), [2014] EWHC 2661 (Pat), proceedings in which Actavis was seeking the revocation of Pharmacia's patent, undertakings eventually offered by Pharmacia tipped the balance in favour of a stay of the UK proceedings. The undertakings included that, during the life of the patent, Pharmacia would: (i) not seek an injunction at all; and (ii) only seek damages of 1% of net sales in the UK. In contrast, in Eli Lilly v Janssen [2016] EWHC 313 (Pat) (a case in which Lilly sought revocation of Janssen's patent), the undertakings offered by Janssen were not sufficient to overcome Lilly's need for commercial certainty. Neither the duration nor the level of any royalty payment was defined, which made it difficult for Lilly to decide when to begin the process of seeking a marketing authorisation for its product.

Next in our 'The basics of patent law' series, we will be discussing remedies and costs.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

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.

Events from this Firm
21 Sep 2017, Seminar, London, UK

Has Cloud replaced traditional outsourcing models? We will compare cloud to outsourcing, consider whether they have effectively become the same thing for many solutions and assess some of the advantages and disadvantages of each model.

3 Oct 2017, Seminar, London, UK

Join us over breakfast for our third retail-focused seminar.

17 Oct 2017, Workshop, Birmingham, UK

This practical workshop will take in-house counsel through the life of a brand, providing guidance on issues which regularly arise.

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.