Called to the bar 1992 and took silk in 2009

Practice Area
Justin Turner's practice is concerned with all areas of intellectual property and other commercial disputes with a technical character. His technical background has resulted in the major part of his practice being connected within the academic disciplines of pharmacology and biotechnology in relation to which he has acted in a number of leading cases. He was instructed by GSK in various patent proceedings connected with paroxetine (SEROXAT) and by Human Genome Sciences in relation to its patent for the novel cytokine BLyS. He represented both Biogen and, more recently, Lundbeck before the House of Lords in the two leading cases on how the law of sufficiency impacts on breadth of claim.

Justin Turner regularly appears in proceedings at the European Patent Office, representing Merck in its opposition to the patent asserted by Pfizer against VIOXX (T0812/00). More recently he represented WARF in its appeal to the Enlarged Board of Appeal of EPO concerning the patentability of embryonic stem cells (G2/06) and Centocor in its opposition to Bayer's patent relating to antibodies to TNF alpha (T0601/05).

Justin Turner has a particular interest in misuse of confidential information having represented SmithKline Beecham when it asserted confidential information in the genetic code of a production strain of Streptomyces clavuligerus. He also represented LIFFE, the derivatives exchange, in a claim for misuse of confidential information in a trading system for credit default swaps.

In the area of trade marks, he has acted for Boehringer Ingelheim in relation to a comparative advertising campaign and 8PM Chemists in its successful summary judgment application against Eli Lilly, as to its entitlement to transit goods through the EEA. He has also recently represented Nokia in its judicial review of HMRC's policy not to seize counterfeit goods, in transit through the UK, under the Counterfeit Goods Regulation; in respect of which the Court of Appeal has recently referred questions to the ECJ.

Justin Turner sits on GTAC, the gene therapy advisory committee which advises the UK government in relation to both gene and stem cell therapies and is responsible for approving clinical trials in relation to these therapies. He is also a director of UKAD, the United Kingdom anti-doping agency, which carries out the testing of athletes and brings proceedings for breech of WADA anti-doping violations.

Justin Turner has conducted a number of mediations on behalf of the design organisation ACID.

Education and Qualifications
Scientific
1981 - 1986 Studied at the Royal Veterinary College, London University, graduating with a Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine in 1986.
1987 - 1991 Studied at Emmanuel College, Cambridge University, graduating with a PhD in immunology from the department of clinical medicine. His thesis addressed, principally, the role played by interleukins and interferons in the control of immune responses to viral infections.
1990 Consultant scientist at the International Laboratory for Research into Animal Disease, Nairobi. This is an international institute formed for the purpose of developing a vaccine for trypanosomiasis.

Legal
1990 Studied for a diploma in law at City University. Awarded a Harmsworth Scholarship by Middle Temple.
1991 Attended the Inns of Court School of Law.
1992 Called to the Bar.

United Kingdom cases Justin Turner has been involved in include:
• Biogen v. Medeva [1997] RPC 1 (House of Lords: patent proceedings relating to recombinant hepatitis vaccine),
• Kastner v. Rizla [1995] RPC 585 (a leading patent infringement case in the court of appeal),
• SmithKline Beecham v. Norton & Lek [1997] FSR 81 (AUGMENTIN - patent proceedings and also a claim for misuse of confidential information in the DNA sequence of a strain of Streptomyces clavuligerus used in the production of potassium clavulanate),
• Visx v. Nidek [1999] FSR 405(patent proceedings relating to excimer laser surgery for myopia),
• DSM v Novo [2001] RPC 675 (patent proceedings relating to phytase)
• Bristol Myers Squibb v. Baker Norton and Napro [2001] RPC 1 (TAXOL – patent proceedings relating to a medical use claim for chemotherapy),
• Norozian v Arks [1998] FSR 394 (film copyright relating to an advert for GUINNESS)
Coflexip v Stolt Comex [2001] 182 (patent proceedings relating to a vertical lay system for flexible pipe),
• Monsanto and Pfizer v. Merck [2002] RPC 758 (VIOXX - patent proceedings relating to COX-2 Inhibitors),
• SmithKline Beecham’s Patent [2003] RPC 114 (SEROXAT anticipation under section 2(3) of Patents Act 1977)
• SmithKline Beecham’s Patent [2003] RPC 855 (SEROXAT – patent proceedings relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
• SmithKline Beecham’s Patent [2003] RPC 769(SEROXAT – patent proceedings relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate.)
• SmithKline Beecham v Apotex [2003] FSR 544 (SEROXAT – interim injunction granted pending trial under patent relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
• Coflexip v Stolt Offshore [2003] FSR 41 (court of appeal, principles to be applied on an enquiry as to damages)
• Technip France SA’s Patent [2004] RPC 46 (court of appeal, second action relating to validity of patent for vertical lay system)
• Glaxo Group Limited’s Patent [2004] RPC 843 (validity of patent relating to SERETIDE)
• SmithKline Beecham v Apotex [2004] RPC 27 (SEROXAT – second patent proceedings relation to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
• Cambridge Antibody Technology v Abbott [2005] FSR 27 (licence dispute as to royalty payments to be made pursuant to a joint development collaboration agreement in relation to HUMIRA).
• Dyson technology v Strutt [2005] EWHC 2814 (misuse of confidential information and restrictive covenant relating to vacuum technology)
• Synthon v SmithKline Beecham [2005] UKHL 59 (House of Lords decision on the correct approach to novelty in the context of a patent to a polymorph)
• LIFFE v Pinkava [2006] EWHC 595 (entitlement proceedings and misuse of confidential information relating to financial derivatives)
• Baxter Healthcare v Abbott [2007] EWHC (patent proceedings concerning the storage of the anaesthetic sevoflurane)
• Boehringer Ingelheim v Vetplus [2007] FSR 29 (court of appeal, comparative advertising and trade mark infringement under the Human Rights Act)
• Cantor Gaming v Game Account Global [2008] FSR 4 (copyright infringement and breach of contract relating to gaming software)
• Arrow Generics v Merck [2007] FSR 39 (jurisdiction of the court to make a declaration in respect of the validity of a patent application)
• Wobben v Vestas-Celtic [2007] EWHC 2636 (patent proceedings relating to wind energy systems)
• Eli Lilly v 8PM [2008] FSR 11 (decision of the Court of Appeal concerning whether transiting goods through Europe is trade mark infringement)
• Eli Lilly v Human Genome Sciences [2008] EWHC 1903 (patent proceedings relating to the novel cytokine BLyS identified by bioinformatics)
• Boehringer v Vetplus [2007] FSR 29 (whether the principle in Bonnard v Perryman applies to trade mark infringement in a comparative advertising campaign)
• Generics (UK) Limited and others v H Lundbeck A/S [2009] UKHL 12 (House of Lords decision concerning the sufficiency and breadth of claim)
• Lilly and others v 8PM [2009] EWHC 1905 (damages enquiry following grant of a wrongful injunction)
• Novartis and CibaVision v Johnson & Johnson [2009] EWHC 1671 (patent proceedings relating to extended wear contact lenses)

Interests and pastimes
Pastimes include playing squash (the Lansdowne Club and The Jesters), real tennis (Canford), riding and music. Academic interests include evolutionary biology and the history of science.