Justin Turner QCCalled to the bar 1992 Took silk 2009 Silk
Justin Turner’s practice is concerned with all areas of intellectual property and other commercial disputes with a technical character. His technical background (a PhD in immunology) has resulted in a major part of his practice being concerned with biotechnology. He has also presented cases relating to computer software, financial derivatives, electrical engineering, wind turbines, telecoms, industrial process chemistry, ship building and the oil industry. He appears in the UK courts, the European Patent Office and the Court of Justice of the EU. He represents clients in international arbitration. In addition to general IP matters Justin has significant experience of damages inquiries, jurisdictional disputes, Arrow declaratory relief and anti-doping violations.
Justin was voted IP/IT Silk of the Year by Chambers and Partners in 2016. He has been described as “an outstanding advocate and a very clever scientist” with a “fantastic mix of strategic ability and a keen eye for detail” who has also been praised for his ability as a cross-examiner (Chambers and Partners).
Justin Turner has recently represented Regeneron in relation to its patents for transgenic (reverse chimeric) human-antibody-producing mice: the leading case on insufficiency. He represented Genentech in relation to its patent to IL17 A/F and Gilead Sciences in its litigation with Idenix concerning sofosbuvir (Solvaldi) anti-HCV therapy. He has also represented Warner Lambert before the Court of Appeal in the leading case on the correct construction of second medical use patents. He has been in many of the leading cases concerning interim injunctive relief including Novartis v Hospira and SmithKline Beecham v Apotex.
Justin Turner formerly sat on GTAC, the gene therapy advisory committee which is responsible for approving gene therapy and stem cell clinical trials in the UK. He was formerly 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. He currently sits on the governing council of University College London (UCL)
Justin Turner is an editor of the 18th edition of Terrell on the Law of Patents.
RECENT CASES INCLUDE
• Eli Lilly v Genentech  EWHC 387 – Representing Genentech in relation to a patent for IL17A/F
• Ablynx v VHSquared  EWHC 782 representing Ablynx in relation to a jurisdictional dispute concerning Articles 24 and 31 of Brussels
• Dansac v Salts Healthcare  EWHC 104 – a trade mark action concerning parallel importation of medical devices.
• GSK v Vectura  EWHC 3414 – Representing GSK in relation to an Arrow declaration and invalidity proceedings of patents for inhalation
• LIQWD v L’Oreal  EWCA 1943– Representing L’Oreal in an action seeking revocation of a patent for the use of maleic acid in hair
• Regeneron Pharmaceuticals v Kymab  EWCA Civ 1186 – Representing Regeneron in relation to its patents to the reverse chimeric
transgenic immunoglobulin loci both in UK proceedings and before the technical board of appeal of the EPO.
• Wobben Properties v Siemens  EWCA 2114,  EWCA Civ 5 – Representing Siemens in defending patent infringement proceedings relating
to high wind ride through for off-shore wind turbines.
• Warner Lambert v Actavis  EWCA Civ 556 – Representing Warner Lambert in relation to the enforcement of a second medical use patent for
Lyrica – a leading case on the correct approach to construction of second medical use claims.
• Idenix Pharmaceuticals v Gilead Sciences  EWHC 3916,  EWCA Civ 1089 – Representing Gilead in defending patent infringement
proceedings brought in respect of sofosbuvir, a revolutionary antiviral therapy for hepatitis C.
• Hospira v Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology – Representing the Kennedy Trust in defending patents relating to TNF alpha and methotrexate for RA
– the action settled mid-trial. He is currently involved in EPO proceedings relating to the same patents.
• Novartis v Hospira  EWCA Civ 583 – Representing Novartis in a leading case on the obtaining
of a post judgment injunction (relating to Aclasta)
• Merck Sharp Dome and Bristol Myers v Teva  EWCA 1958 – Representing Merck and Bristol Myers in a leading case on the obtaining of quia
timet injunctive relief
• Glenmark v Wellcome Foundation and Glaxo  EWHC 148 – Representing Wellcome (GSK) in patent revocation proceedings relating to Malarone
• Neurim C130/11 – Obtaining from the CJEU a ruling that, contrary to earlier case law, SPCs were permissible in the field of second medical
• HTC v Apple  EWCA 451 – Representing the Comptroller before the CA concerning the patentability of computer software and opposing
Apple’s swipe to unlock and multitouch patents
• Convatec and others v Smith & Nephew and others  EWHC 2039 – Representing Smith & Nephew and SFM in the successful defence of a
complex misuse of confidential information and patent infringement case in relation to cellulose based wound dressings.
• Medimmune v Novartis  EWHC 1669 – Representing Novartis in its successful action for revocation of the McCafferty phage display patent
• Eli Lilly v Human Genome Sciences  EWHC 1903 successfully defending an obviousness attack relating to the novel cytokine BLyS
identified by bioinformatics
Justin Turner has a particular interest in misuse of confidential information. In addition to Convatec v Smith & Nephew (referred to above) he 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.
Justin Turner has conducted a number of mediations on behalf of the design organisation ACID.
Further United Kingdom Cases Justin Turner has been involved in include:
- Biogen v. Medeva  RPC 1 (House of Lords: patent proceedings relating to recombinant hepatitis vaccine),
- Kastner v. Rizla  RPC 585 (a leading patent infringement case in the court of appeal),
- SmithKline Beecham v. Norton & Lek  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  FSR 405(patent proceedings relating to excimer laser surgery for myopia),
- DSM v Novo  RPC 675 (patent proceedings relating to phytase)
- Bristol Myers Squibb v. Baker Norton and Napro  RPC 1 (TAXOL – patent proceedings relating to a medical use claim for chemotherapy),
- Norozian v Arks  FSR 394 (film copyright relating to an advert for GUINNESS)
Coflexip v Stolt Comex  182 (patent proceedings relating to a vertical lay system for flexible pipe),
- Monsanto and Pfizer v. Merck  RPC 758 (VIOXX – patent proceedings relating to COX-2 Inhibitors),
- SmithKline Beecham’s Patent  RPC 114 (SEROXAT anticipation under section 2(3) of Patents Act 1977)
- SmithKline Beecham’s Patent  RPC 855 (SEROXAT – patent proceedings relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
- SmithKline Beecham’s Patent  RPC 769(SEROXAT – patent proceedings relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate.)
- SmithKline Beecham v Apotex  FSR 544 (SEROXAT – interim injunction granted pending trial under patent relating to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
- Coflexip v Stolt Offshore  FSR 41 (court of appeal, principles to be applied on an enquiry as to damages)
- Technip France SA’s Patent  RPC 46 (court of appeal, second action relating to validity of patent for vertical lay system)
- Glaxo Group Limited’s Patent  RPC 843 (validity of patent relating to SERETIDE)
- SmithKline Beecham v Apotex  RPC 27 (SEROXAT – second patent proceedings relation to paroxetine hydrochloride anhydrate)
- Cambridge Antibody Technology v Abbott  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  EWHC 2814 (misuse of confidential information and restrictive covenant relating to vacuum technology)
- Synthon v SmithKline Beecham  UKHL 59 (House of Lords decision on the correct approach to novelty in the context of a patent to a polymorph)
- LIFFE v Pinkava  EWHC 595 (entitlement proceedings and misuse of confidential information relating to financial derivatives)
- Baxter Healthcare v Abbott  EWHC (patent proceedings concerning the storage of the anaesthetic sevoflurane)
- Boehringer Ingelheim v Vetplus  FSR 29 (court of appeal, comparative advertising and trade mark infringement under the Human Rights Act)
- Cantor Gaming v Game Account Global  FSR 4 (copyright infringement and breach of contract relating to gaming software)
- Arrow Generics v Merck  FSR 39 (jurisdiction of the court to make a declaration in respect of the validity of a patent application)
- Wobben v Vestas-Celtic  EWHC 2636 (patent proceedings relating to wind energy systems)
- Eli Lilly v 8PM  FSR 11 (decision of the Court of Appeal concerning whether transiting goods through Europe is trade mark infringement)
- Eli Lilly v Human Genome Sciences  EWHC 1903 (patent proceedings relating to the novel cytokine BLyS identified by bioinformatics)
- Boehringer v Vetplus  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  UKHL 12 (House of Lords decision concerning the sufficiency and breadth of claim)
- Lilly and others v 8PM  EWHC 1905 (damages enquiry following grant of a wrongful injunction)
- Novartis and CibaVision v Johnson & Johnson  EWHC 1671 (patent proceedings relating to extended wear contact lenses).
- Apimed Medical Limited v Brightwake Limited  RPC 16 (patent proceedings relating to honey wound dressings)
- Molnlycke Healthcare AB v Brightwake Limited  EWHC 376 (patent proceedings relating to silicone wound dressings)
- H Lundbeck A/S v Norpharma and others  EWHC 907 (patent proceedings relating to a process for the synthesis of 5cbx used in the manufacture of escitalopram)
- Medimmune Limited v Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited  EWHC 1669 (patent proceedings relating to phage display – invalidity of the McCafferty patent)
- Convatec Limited and others v Smith & Nephew Limited and others  EWHC 2039 (patent proceedings relating to a cellulose-based wound dressing)
Education and Qualifications
- 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.
- 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.
Interests and Pastimes
Pastimes, before having children, included playing tennis, squash and real tennis (The Queens Club and The Jesters), fly fishing, riding and music. Casual academic interests include evolutionary biology, the history of science and macroeconomics.
IP/IT Silk of the Year 2016CHAMBERS & PARTNERS BAR AWARDS 2016
“He engages in the thorough vetting of a case that allows him to go into court robustly. An outstanding advocate and a very clever scientist”CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS 2016
“A really tenacious advocate, who is effective in a difficult case”CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS 2015
“Outstanding”LEGAL 500, 2016