With over 500 lawyers we would expect to be able to provide the specialist skill and experience that you need. Browse our lawyers and teams below.
With nearly 500 lawyers we have the skills and experience you need.
Are you coming to one of our offices and need to know how to find us?
Send us your enquiry and we will get back to you as soon as possible
The UK's top court has focused on patent validity in an important case for the life sciences sector.
The dispute involved patent claims covering transgenic mice that were able to produce humanised antibodies. And the question at the heart of the case was; how much information is needed in a patent in order to justify broad claims? If later users of the technology have a major project on their hands to apply it in a useful way, has the patent applicant done enough?
The Supreme Court, in a majority decision, reversed the Court of Appeal and decided that the teaching provided in the patent was insufficient, meaning that the patent was invalid.
Should research-based companies be concerned that their ground-breaking work will not receive the protection it deserves? Or is this a fair outcome that protects competitors from unfair litigation? James Fry discusses what the ruling means for life sciences businesses here.
Senior Legal Adviser
Register for My M&R to stay up-to-date with legal news and events, create brochures and bookmark pages.
Log in to your client extranet for free matter information, know-how and documents.
Mills & Reeve system for employees.
Added to your bookmarks
This will be stored in your bookmarks list for 90 days or until you remove it.
This page has been added to your brochure. To manage your brochure click on the button below.
Or click on
at the top of every page.