JUVE Comment

The barristers of 11 South Square have a huge breadth of experience, including in pharmaceutical regulatory work and highly-technical telecommunications trials. In June, alongside a QC, junior barrister Adam Gamsa represented Mylan in litigation against Neurim and Flynn at the Court of Appeal – he has “excellent technical and tactical skills“, (competitor). Other juniors were also visible appearing for Edwards Lifesciences against Meril at the Court of Appeal.

This year, 11 South Square has also maintained its reputation of excellence in telecommunications, with appearances in major tech disputes at the UK courts. Such a platform is vital in securing the reputation of the up-and-coming, and more established, junior barristers. Litigation between IPCom and Vodafone, whose outcome had a huge impact on crown-use policy in the UK, saw two of the set’s barristers appear for IPCom in a continuation of the relationship between the client and the set.

The set was also visible in cases related to the ongoing debate between Conversant, and Huawei and ZTE. Here, the highly-recommended silk Iain Purvis acted on the manufacturer side – “A leader of the IP bar” (competitor).

Despite its historic strength in telecommunications cases, over 2020 11 South Square has further demonstrated its aptitude for complex life sciences disputes. At the Supreme Court, the set appeared for Kymab, successfully securing the company a win against Regeneron over transgenic mouse technology.

11 South Square also has capacities beyond patent, including in trademark and copyright cases, and regularly advises in other cases concerning, for example, media, communications and IT law. With seven silks and eleven juniors, the size of the set has remained stable in the past year. However, the relatively small number of QCs does not prevent 11 South Square demonstrating the technical know-how present across the breadth of its barristers. The set is especially adept at ensuring its juniors are visible in high-stakes cases.

The set also has form in staffing the UK judiciary, with current Court of Appeal judges Richard Arnold and Christopher Floyd hailing from 11 South Square. Current IPEC judge Richard Hacon is also a former tenant. The set has five female junior barristers, yet still no female QCs.

Recommended individuals

Brian Nicholson (“excellent for technical trials; doesn’t need to be led“, competitor), Iain Purvis (“pragmatic, commercial, and an outstanding advocate in TMT litigation”; “an IP bar leader at the height of his powers“, competitor); Piers Acland (“great for difficult biological or pharmaceutical cases“, competitor), Kathryn Pickard (“she really understands the commercial side“,; “pragmatic, responsive, easy to work with“, competitors), Adam Gamsa

Team

7 QCs, 11 juniors

Clients

Supreme Court: Kymab (claimant, Iain Purvis) against Regeneron over transgenic mouse technology; Court of Appeal: ZTE (defendant, Iain Purvis) and Huawei against Conversant over FRAND jurisdiction; Mylan (defendant, Mark Vanhegan, Adam Gamsa) against Neurim and Flynn over insomnia drugs; High Court: Edwards Lifesciences (claimant, Iain Purvis, Piers Acland, Kathryn Pickard, Mitchell Beebe) against Meril Life Sciences over heart valves; Lufthansa (claimant, Hugo Cuddigan, Christopher Hall) against Astronics, Safran and Panasonic (Piers Acland) over energy supply in airseats; IPCom (claimant, Brian Nicholson, Adam Gamsa) against Vodafone over mobile network access.