Actavis v Lilly: practice points from the patent attorney perspective

Now that the first interpretation by the courts of the Actavis v Lilly judgment (Actavis v Lilly [2017] UKSC 48 [1]) has been handed down (Generics UK v Yeda [2017] EWHC 2629 [2]), Timothy Powell and Sara Holland examine the recent judgments from a patent attorney perspective and comment on how they may affect the daily life of the patent attorney.

In the latest issue of CIPA Journal, they consider the uncertainty on how equivalents and file estoppel will be applied by the courts, the dividing line between novelty and inventiveness and the implications of the reformulated Improver test. Read the full article on page 17.