header-logo header-logo

Turpitude & the rule of law

05 December 2014 / Jack Harris
Issue: 7633 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
jack-harris

The Supreme Court has provided important guidance on the illegality defence, as Jack Harris reports

In the recent case of Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc [2014] UKSC 55, [2014] All ER (D) 328 (Oct), the Supreme Court provided guidance on when a defence of illegality (or ex turpi causa non oritur actio ) may be made out. Although this was an intellectual property case, concerning an alleged patent infringement, it has important ramifications for personal injury claims too.

The facts

Les Laboratoires Servier (LLS) was a French pharmaceutical company. LLS began proceedings against Apotex Inc (Apotex) for alleged infringement of a UK patent held by LLS on a particular drug. Mann J granted LLS an interim injunction on condition that LLS agreed to provide the usual cross-undertaking in damages to Apotex. Subsequently, Pumfrey J held that the patent was invalid and thus discharged the injunction.

Accordingly, Apotex sought to enforce the undertaking in damages. It was agreed that, but for the interim injunction, Apotex would have sold 3.6 million packs

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll