header-logo header-logo

Secrets & laws

06 March 2015 / Lucia Williams , Margaret Tofalides
Issue: 7643 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail
nlj_7643_tofalideswilliams

Margaret Tofalides & Lucia Williams put disclosure & confidentiality in IP arbitration under scrutiny

Intellectual property (IP) disputes are ever more frequently being submitted to arbitration, and parties often raise questions about confidentiality. Of particular concern are issues surrounding patent disputes and the analysis of the compounds, formulas and processes they involve. Many IP disputes centre on techniques employed or business information, all of which are highly sensitive, and strict measures need to be implemented in the arbitration to protect the parties’ rights.

The numerous benefits of arbitration range from the flexible nature of arbitral procedure, over which the parties have quasi-absolute control, to the ease of enforceability of arbitration awards and the fact that IP-related issues can be resolved in a single set of proceedings rather than having to be litigated in every jurisdiction in which the IP right is allegedly infringed. Patent litigation on a large scale can be a drain on resources and produce unsatisfactory results. The mammoth Apple-Samsung patent dispute, for example, has involved over 50 lawsuits

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll