Kathryn Pickard KC

Photo of

Call: 2001
Silk: 2025

Kathryn’s practice covers all areas of Intellectual Property law. She draws on her scientific background to get to grips with challenging and diverse technology. Recent cases have concerned pharmaceuticals, robotic warehousing, laser eye surgery, cryptocurrencies, DNA sequencing, eSIM cards, antibody testing and FRAND/RAND licensing. Kathryn has a particular interest in patent law and is also regularly instructed in matters concerning trade marks, passing off, designs, copyright, confidential information and trade secrets.

Kathryn has extensive experience of litigation in the High Court and Court of Appeal and represents clients in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, Intellectual Property Office, before the Appointed Person and at mediation. She has appeared three times in the Supreme Court: Tesla v Avanci (judgment reserved); Warner-Lambert, validity and infringement of second-medical use patents, and Starbucks, a passing off case concerning “NOW TV”; and in the House of Lords in Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, a patent entitlement case.

Kathryn has experience of intellectual property litigation in other jurisdictions. She was a practising member of the Faculty of Advocates from 2014-2019, during which time she appeared regularly in the Court of Session. Kathryn was also instructed to act in a 10-day breach of confidence action before the Supreme Court of Gibraltar.

Whilst a junior Kathryn was awarded Chambers and Partners “IT/IP Junior of the Year” twice (in 2018 and 2023) and was the Lawyer’s ‘Barrister of the Week’ in July 2021. Kathryn was Consulting Editor of Halsbury’s Laws Vol 97A (2021): Trade Marks and Trade Names.

View Privacy Notice

Recent & Notable Cases

Tesla, Inc and another (Appellants) v InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc and others (Respondents) [2026] UKSC 27

On 27 July 2026, the UK Supreme Court handed down judgment in this matter.  The appeal considered the first instance decision of Fancourt J ([2024] EWHC 1815 (Ch)) and the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal...

Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. & anor v Nokia Corporation & anor / Paramount Skydance Corporation v Nokia Corporation & anor [2026] EWHC 1505 (Pat)

This case concerns interim payments for RAND licences for video streaming technology. Warner Bros. Discovery (“WBD”) and Paramount sought a RAND licence from Nokia to the Nokia Video Portfolio. The parties agreed a me...

Samsung v ZTE [2026] EWHC 999 (Pat)

The Patents Court (Meade J) determined the FRAND lump sum payable by Samsung to ZTE under a cross-licence to the parties’ respective 5G portfolios. The case is of interest for the Judge’s treatment of the dispute betw...

Acer, Hisense & Asus v Nokia Technologies OY [2025] EWHC 3331 (Pat)

Nokia was the owner of a portfolio of patents declared essential to video decoding standards of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU-T). Hisense and the other Claimants commenced proceedings for a declaration a...

Generics (UK) Ltd, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd & Anor v AstraZeneca AB [2025] EWCA Civ 903

AstraZeneca held two supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) protecting dapagliflozin, an inhibitor of sodium-dependent glucose co-transporter proteins, used for treating Type II diabetes. The patent underlying the...

Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motorcars Ltd & Anr [2025] EWHC 1584 (KB)

Rolls-Royce applied to set aside an ex parte order, granted by the Senior Master of the King’s Bench Division, which gave effect to a Letter of Request issued by the United States District Court of California. The Let...

AstraZeneca v Glenmark, Teva, Viatris & Ors [2025] EWHC 1339 (Pat)

AstraZeneca, the patentee & SPC holder, sought interim relief to prevent generic dapagliflozin being put on the market in the UK. A number of pharmaceutical companies, including Glenmark, Teva and Viatris, were sough...

Generics (UK) Ltd, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd & Anor v AstraZeneca AB [2025] EWHC 1012 (Pat)

AstraZeneca held two supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) protecting dapagliflozin, an inhibitor of sodium-dependent glucose co-transporter proteins, used for treating Type II diabetes. The patent underlying the...

Lenovo v Ericsson [2025] EWCA Civ 182

Lenovo successfully appealed against the decision of Richards J dismissing its application for a short term licence to hold the ring pending determination of FRAND terms. The Court of Appeal were unanimous that Ericss...

Hill v Touchlight [2025] EWHC 107 (Pat)

Dr Hill was an expert in thermophilic proteins with a background in DNA cloning and vaccine technology. She conceived a method of making “doggybone DNA”, in which a specific enzyme – known as a “protelomerase” – was used...

Lenovo Group Ltd v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson [2024] EWHC 2941 (Pat)

This was an application for a short term licence between the parties pending determination of FRAND terms by a court of competent jurisdiction. The parties were engaged in negotiations for a cross-licence in respect o...

Sandoz AG & Ors v Biogen MA Inc. [2024] EWHC 2567 (Pat)

Nataluzimab is an effective antibody treatment for multiple sclerosis. A rare, but potentially devastating side effect of treatment, is development of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopothy (“PML”). PML is caused by...

Motorola Mobility LLC v Ericsson Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1100

The parties were engaged in negotiations for a cross-licence in respect of each other’s standard essential patents. Both parties had referred the question of FRAND terms to a court – the appellants to the Patents Court a...

Samsung Bioepsis v Janssen Biotech [2024] EWHC 1984 (Pat)

This was a patent revocation claim concerning a method of treating ulcerative colitis using an anti-IL12/IL23 antibody to achieve corticosteroid free clinical remission. The patent disclosed that the antibody in question...

CRYPTO Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch)

This was the denouement of multi-party / multi-action litigation concerning the claim by Dr Craig Wright to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin. The case is notable for its discussion of the mode...

Tesla v InterDigital & Avanci [2024] EWHC 1815 (Ch)

In this important decision as to the scope of the Patent Court’s Jurisdiction to hear implementor-brought FRAND determinations in respect of platform/pool licensing of Standards Essential Patents, Brian Nicholson KC and...

Kigen v Thales

Iain Purvis KC, Kathryn Pickard, David Ivison and Miruna Bercariu were instructed by Reed Smith LLP to act for Kigen in the Kigen v Thales HP-2022-000011 FRAND dispute relating to standards-essential eSIM patents.  This...

Nicoventures Trading Ltd v Philip Morris Products SA [2023] EWHC 854 (Pat)

This patent revocation and infringement action concerned two Philip Morris patents for “heat not burn” tobacco systems that used inductive heating. The Court held that the patents were valid but not infringed. Iain Purv...

Philip Morris Products, SA v Nicoventures Trading Ltd & Anr [2022] EWCA Civ 1638

This was an appeal against the decision of Marcus Smith J that four patents for “heat not burn” tobacco products were invalid for obviousness. Philip Morris, the patentee, contended that the Judge had erred in his constr...

AutoStore Technology AS v Ocado Group Plc [2021] EWHC 1614 (Pat)

The parties are engaged in patent litigation concerning AutoStore’s patents for automated warehousing technology. By this application, Ocado sought an interim injunction to restrain AutoStore from disclosing certain info...

Philip Morris Products SA & anr v RAI Strategic Holdings [2021] EWHC 537 (Pat) & anr

Decision of Meade J addressing infringement and validity of two BAT patents directed to ‘heat-not-burn’ tobacco technology. The Judge found that Philip Morris’s IQOS system would have infringed the patents if valid, but...

Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA & Ors [2021] EWHC 57 (Pat)

This was a patent action concerning DNA sequencing technology. Illumina was the proprietor of five patents which it alleged were infringed by MGI’s systems. Three of the patents related to a reversible chain terminato...

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation & Anor v Meril GmbH & Anor [2020] EWHC 2562 (Pat)

This was the first of three technical trials in a patent action concerning transcatheter heart values, artificial heart valves that can be implanted into a patient without the need for surgery, and their delivery systems...

Akebia Therapeutics Inc v Fibrogen, Inc & Astellas [2020] EWHC 866 (Pat)

A multi-patent action concerning the use of an enzyme inhibitor to treat anaemia and related conditions. The patents in issue fell into two families – Family A & Family B – and included claims to classes of compounds...

Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan and anr [2018] UKSC 56

The Supreme Court has given its long-awaited decision on sufficiency and infringement of second medical use claims (in Swiss-form) and the approach to post-trial amendment of patents. Following numerous decisions of t...

Parainen Pearl Shipping Limited v Kristian Gerhard Jebsen Skipsrederai SA [2018] EWHC 2628 (Pat)

A patent case concerning a specialised cement carrying ship that comprised a patented cement unloading system. The ship had suffered extensive damage when it ran aground in the Oslo Fjord. The Claimant was a purchaser of...

Generics (UK) Ltd v Yeda Research and Development Co [2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat)

  Generics (UK) Ltd v Yeda Research and Development Co[2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat): these patent proceedings concerned a dosage regimen for glatiramer acetate (“GA”) a treatment for Multiple Sclerosis, sold by Teva und...

Edwards Lifesciences LLC v Boston Scientific Scimed Inc, [2017] EWHC 405 (Pat); [2017] EWHC 755 (Pat)

This was a patent action about transcatheter heart valves i.e. artificial heart valves that can be implanted in patients without the need for surgery. It concerned two of Boston’s patents for “repositionable heart valves...

Teva (UK) Ltd v Gilead Sciences Inc [2017] EWHC 13 (Pat)

This was a challenge to the validity of Gilead’s SPC for an HIV-medication – Truvada – which comprised a combination of two active ingredients (Tenofovir and Emtricitabine). A number of pharmaceutical companies, includin...

Property Renaissance Ltd (t/a Titanic Spa) v Stanley Dock Hotel Ltd (t/a Titanic Hotel) [2016] EWHC 3103 (Ch)

This was a trade mark and passing off case concerning the right to use the name “Titanic”. Titanic Spa commenced proceedings against the Titanic Hotel for trade mark infringement and passing off, relying upon its “Titani...

Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Warner-Lambert Co LLC [2016] EWCA Civ 1006

This was the hearing of three appeals arising from the “pregabalin” litigation, which concerned validity and infringement of a second medical use patent. The three questions for the CA were: (i) had the Judge correctly a...

Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd & Ors [2016] EWHC 576 (Pat) Trial C

This was the third technical trial in the mobile telecommunications patent case between Unwired Planet and Huawei & Samsung, concerning Unwired Planet’s patent portfolio. The patent in issue was entitled “Method f...

Accord Healthcare Ltd v Astellas Pharma GmbH [2015] EWHC 3676 (Ch)

This case concerned the correct interpretation of Articles 6, 8 and 10 of Directive 2001/83/EC on medicinal products for human use (the “Directive”). Accord applied for marketing authorisations in a number of Member S...

Generics (UK) Limited t/a Mylan v Warner-Lambert Company LLC [2015] EWHC 2548 (Pat)

Warner-Lambert’s patent was a second medical use patent, which covered the use of pregabalin for the treatment of pain. Pregabalin was known as a treatment for epilepsy and generalised anxiety disorder. Mylan sought r...

Starbucks (HK) Limited & Anr v British Sky Broadcasting Group plc & Ors [2015] UKSC 31

The Supreme Court has considered the difficult question as to when an overseas business can rely upon the goodwill in its name to restrain acts of passing off in the UK.  The Appellants ran a very successful TV subscr...

Fresh Trading Limited -v- (1) Deepend Fresh Recovery Limited (2) Andrew Chappell [2015] EWHC 52 (Ch)

This case concerned the copyright in the "Dude" logo - the cartoon face with a halo which is used by Innocent Smoothies. The 'Dude' was designed by a company called Deepend pursuant to an agreement under which it would b...

Teva UK v AstraZeneca AB [2014] EWHC 2873 (Pat)

This was a second-medical use case concerning the use of a combination of budesonide and formoterol in the treatment of asthma. The combination had previously been known for maintenance treatment only but the patent disc...

Kennametal Inc v Pramet Tools SRO & Anor [2014] EWHC 565 (Pat)

This was a patent infringement and validity action concerning inserts for milling cutter tools. The Court held that there was no infringement and that, in any event, the patent was invalid in light of the prior art. T...

Samsung v Apple [2012] EWHC 1882 (Pat)

Acted for Samsung in expedited trial for a declaration that Samsung’s tablet computers did not infringe Apple’s registered design Samsung v Apple [2012] EWHC 1882 (Pat)...

Specsavers v Asda [2010] EWHC 2035 (Ch)

Acted for Asda in trade mark and passing off dispute concerning Asda optician’s advertising campaign. Specsavers v Asda [2010] EWHC 2035 (Ch)...

Virgin Atlantic v Premium Aircraft [2009] EWCA Civ 1513

Acted for aircraft manufacturer in long-running dispute with Virgin Atlantic over IPRs in aircraft seating system. Virgin Atlantic v Premium Aircraft  [2009] EWCA Civ 1513...

Honda Motor Co v Neesam [2008] EWHC 338 (Ch)

Acted for parallel importer in case where established that trade mark proprietor had consented to importation. Honda Motor Co v Neesam [2008] EWHC 338 (Ch)...

Yeda Research v Rhone Poulenc Rorer [2007] UKHL 43

Appeared as junior counsel before House of Lords in case concerning the law of patent entitlement Yeda Research v Rhone Poulenc Rorer [2007] UKHL 43...

"Kathryn Pickard KC is an impressive IP barrister offering substantial experience acting for medical device, pharmaceutical and engineering companies. Her experience includes instructions in key patent infringement claims and revocation actions, and she has additional expertise in trade mark disputes. She has acted in multiple high-profile appellate proceedings, including before the Supreme Court."
Chambers and Partners
"Kathryn has very good attention to detail. She was a standout. She was very conscientious and very supportive."
Chambers and Partners
"Kathryn Pickard's advocacy was really good. She was very calm, and she got her point across and got witnesses on her side. She is incredibly responsive and displays very good strategic thinking."
Chambers and Partners
"Kathryn is excellent and one of my go-to patent barristers. She has recently taken silk, and not before time."
Chambers and Partners
"I trust her innately. Kathryn is great - she is operating at the top of her game."
Chambers and Partners
"She is determined and extremely bright. A lateral thinker."
Legal 500
"Kathryn is razor-sharp, both in her oral advocacy and written work. Those who have worked with her attest to her range of abilities, as she has a great work ethic, turns around work product expeditiously, is unafraid of running novel points, has superb drafting, and is also great on her feet."
Legal 500