Photo of Alison Quinn

The English High court has exercised jurisdiction in relation to foreign designations of a European patent. Arnold J gave a lengthy judgment of 376 pages, for which he made no apology, in the action between Actavis and Eli Lilly (Actavis UK Ltd & Ors v Eli Lilly & Company [2014] EWHC 1511 (Pat)). While there were a significant number of issues between the parties, the validity of the patent was not contested.

Actavis, a generic pharmaceutical company, had sought declarations of non-infringement in relation to the UK, French, Italian and Spanish designations of Eli Lilly’s European patent for an anti-cancer drug. The Court, in applying English law, held that they were entitled to such declarations despite the challenge made by Eli Lilly that the English court did not have jurisdiction over the foreign designations.

Continue Reading UK ruling in multi-jurisdictional patent action

Photo of Davinia Brennan

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that the Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC (Directive) is invalid.

The Irish High Court (in Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources & Ors C-293/12) and the Austrian Constitutional Court (in Kärntner Landesregierung, Michael Seitlinger, Christof Tschohl and others, C 594/12), asked the CJEU to examine the validity of the Directive.

Continue Reading CJEU rules that the Data Retention Directive is invalid

Photo of Alison Quinn

Election candidates in the upcoming May local and European Parliament Elections have all recently received correspondence from the Data Protection Commissioner reminding them of their obligations with regards to communicating with the electorate.  Candidates were made aware that should any complaints be received by the office of the Data Protection Commissioner they will be investigated, with appropriate action taken.

Candidates and political parties must adhere to the clear statutory guidelines as set out the in the European Communities (Electronic Communications Networks and Services) (Privacy and Electronic Communications) Regulations 2011, particularly in relation to the use of SMS, phone and e-mail in sending electoral messages. 

Continue Reading Restrictions on electronic direct marketing- politically correct?

Photo of Alison Quinn

The European Court of Human Rights, in Defli AS v Estonia, has upheld unanimously a finding of liability against an Internet news portal regarding offensive comments that were posted online by one of its readers. The Court held that making Defli AS liable for the comments was a justified and proportionate interference with its right to freedom of expression and thta there was no violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression)

The facts of the case date back to 2006, when Delfi AS, one of Estonia’s largest internet news sites published an article relating to a ferry company and its decision to change some of its routes to certain islands. This change subsequently damaged ice roads considered to be a cheaper alternative to the ferry services. This led to an outcry of abusive and potentially defamatory online comments about the owner of the ferry company underneath the article.

Continue Reading Website found liable for online commentary