header-logo header-logo

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

Turpitude & the rule of law

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
back-to-top-scroll