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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll