Pfizer vs GSK: High Stakes Patent Battle

High Court Ruling on Patent Dispute Between Pfizer and GSK

On 16 January 2025, Mr Justice Mellor delivered a judgment in the High Court concerning a patent dispute between Pfizer Limited and GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals S.A along with ID Biomedical Corporation of Quebec. The case, heard in the Intellectual Property List of the Business and Property Courts, revolved around issues of costs, confidentiality, and permission to appeal.

The litigation involved substantial legal costs, with Pfizer's expenses estimated at £6.312 million and GSK's at £3.67 million. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate deductions from Pfizer's costs, given the disparity and the specific issues contested during the trial.

The court applied well-established principles to decide on costs, focusing on the overall winner and whether there were distinct issues warranting cost adjustments. Pfizer was deemed the overall winner, but the court considered deductions for specific issues, including Priority/Belgian law/Novelty and AgrEvo obviousness and insufficiency.

Pfizer agreed to a 15% deduction, while GSK argued for a 38.75% reduction. Ultimately, the court decided on a 30% deduction from Pfizer's costs, reflecting the complexity and specifics of the case.

Regarding interim payments, Pfizer sought 70% of their costs, but the court ordered a 60% interim payment, considering the significant cost disparity between the parties. This resulted in an interim payment of £2.65 million to Pfizer.

Confidentiality was another critical aspect of the judgment. Pfizer sought to maintain confidentiality over technical and commercially sensitive information disclosed during the trial. The court agreed, making a permanent order to protect this information, following the approach established in previous cases.

The court also addressed GSK's application for permission to appeal. GSK raised numerous grounds, but the court found no real prospect of success, particularly concerning the skilled team, common general knowledge, and inventive step. Consequently, permission to appeal was refused.

This case highlights the complexities of patent litigation in the pharmaceutical sector, where costs, confidentiality, and the precise interpretation of patent claims are pivotal. The judgment serves as a significant precedent for future disputes in this field.

Learn More

For more information on patent disputes and related legal principles, see BeCivil's guide to Intellectual Property Law.