Tom specialises in intellectual property litigation. He has represented clients in the English courts, including the Patents Court, the Court of Appeal and the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court. He also has extensive experience in devising multi-jurisdictional patent litigation strategies and co-ordinating with legal teams across Europe and North America. He has advised in relation to patent disputes spanning a wide range of industry sectors and technologies, including the determination of FRAND rates for standards essential patents. His recent High Court trials have related to wind turbines, multi-touch smart phones and computer programming. With an academic background in biochemistry, Tom is well suited to handle complex life science disputes and has represented clients in a variety of cases concerning pharmaceuticals and medical devices.
Tom has advised clients across the range of intellectual properties rights, including trade mark oppositions and infringement proceedings, confidential information, copyright and passing off as well as assisting clients in relation to parallel trade strategies. He has also been involved in judicial review proceedings regarding the domestic implementation of a decision of the European Patent Office and also the transitional provisions leading to the repeal of section 52 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act.
Tom has extensive experience in a wide range of interlocutory proceedings, including in obtaining preliminary injunctions and Norwich Pharmaceutical orders for the provision of infringing customers’ details.
In 2019 Tom spent several months in Düsseldorf seconded to a leading German firm specialising in patent litigation.
In addition to intellectual property disputes Tom has experience of commercial litigation in the construction and engineering sectors. He has also spent time in-house seconded to the legal team of a major airline.
Tom joined Powell Gilbert in 2010, and became a partner in 2020.
Key cases
-
Ansell v Reckitt Benckiser (synthetic polyisoprene products)
-
Leonardo MW v Elbit Systems (missile defence systems)
-
Napp v Dr Reddy’s & Sandoz (buprenorphine transdermal patches & subsequent cross undertaking damages inquiry)
-
Unwired Planet v Huawei & Others (telecommunications / FRAND Licensing)
-
R (Vitra, Cassina, Knoll) v Secretary of State for Business (judicial review - copyright protection)
-
Cambridge University v Punter of England (enforceability of trademark settlement agreement)
-
Wobben Properties v Siemens & Others (wind turbines)
-
Good Technology v Airwatch (mobile management technology)
-
HTC v Gemalto (computer programming)
-
HTC v Apple (smartphones)
-
R (Napp Pharmaceutical) v Comptroller-General of Patents (judicial review of EPO decision)
-
LG v Sony (blu-ray technology / FRAND licensing)
-
W.L .Gore & Associates v Geox (footwear)
-
Abbott v Evysio (coronary stents)
-
W.L. Gore & Associates v Perouse Laboratories (medical devices)