Ravi Mehta

Ravi is instructed (with Thomas de la Mare KC) in a high-profile dispute concerning the alleged breach of EU emissions legislation. In particular, he will be acting in a dispute listed for October 2024, which raises EU law issues under the Withdrawal Act.

Advising a leading NGO in relation to trade and environmental issues.

Ravi acted for the AIRE Centre, as Intervener in an appeal concerning the payment of the care component of disability living allowance (as well as certain Withdrawal Act issues).

Ravi acted alongside Brian Kennelly KC on behalf of the European Banking Authority in a case heard by the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) concerning a challenge to the legality of guidelines issued by the European Banking Authority (“EBA”) in 2016.

Ravi acted successfully for the Interested Party in judicial review proceedings concerning the hybrid abridged procedure for authorisation of medicinal products under article 10(3) of the Medicinal Code. The case raised novel questions of EU law concerning the reliance upon data previously submitted by a separate generic manufacturer.

Ravi acted successfully for the Claimant in the third EU law challenge to the UK’s ongoing failure to meet air quality standards in 45 local authority areas across England and in Wales, raising issues concerning effective domestic remedies for breaches of EU Directives.

In its judgment, the Court ordered a new remedy for the first time in judicial review proceedings: liberty to apply extending to the lawfulness of the supplemental Air Quality Plan for England, published in October 2018.

Ravi is acting for Open Rights Group and Privacy International as interveners in these high-profile proceedings concerning the compatibility of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 with EU law and the ECHR. The Divisional Court ([2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin); [2016] 1 C.M.L.R. 13) declared that that s.1 of the Act is inconsistent with EU law and granted a suspended order disapplying the provision. On appeal, the Court of Appeal referred a number of questions to the CJEU on the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment on the Data Retention Directive in Joined Cases C-293/12 and 594/12 Digital Rights Ireland.

Ravi acted successfully in an EU law challenge to the UK’s failure to meet air quality standards in London and other major urban areas, raising issues concerning effective domestic remedies for breaches of EU Directives. The Court ordered a full reconsideration of the air quality plans for the entire country..

Ravi acted as junior counsel for Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar in this challenge to the legality of Part 3 of the Finance Act 2013 for alleged incompatibility with EU law (with Lord Pannick QC). The High Court referred fundamental questions of EU law to the CJEU, including a question relating to the constitutional status of Gibraltar in EU law which was determined by the Grand Chamber.

Ravi acted for Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar as an Interested Party in proceedings in the Upper Tribunal, which led to a preliminary reference to the CJEU raising issues concerning the applicability of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital provisions of the EU Treaties to persons established in/providing services from Gibraltar. 

Advising PhonepayPlus on its update of the Code of Practice.

Ravi acted successfully in long-running and complex appellate proceedings before the Upper Tribunal concerning the right to employment support allowance for EU nationals residing in the UK on the basis of a temporary and/or permanent incapacity to work and the transitional regime applied to so-called “accession workers”. The case has, to date, given rise to three judgments of the Upper , including a significant ruling that the UK had not derogated from Article 17 of the Citizens’ Directive in relation to A8 nationals, such that they were entitled to rely upon its grounds even whilst awaiting their period of registered employment to be completed. The Upper Tribunal upheld Ms Zakrzewska’s claim.

Acting for a claimant relying upon derivative residence rights on Surinder Singh principles in an appeal to the Upper Tribunal.

Successful appeal (acting pro bono) for claimants in First-Tier and Upper Tribunal proceedings raising Chen, Zambrano and Article 8 ECHR issues.

Ravi acted as junior counsel for Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar in this high profile case concerning a challenge to the compatibility of the Gambling Act 2005, as amended, with EU law. The case raised complex issues concerning the constitutional status of Gibraltar under EU law.

Acting for the claimant in a public procurement challenge to the amendment of one of the largest Government contracts in the UK, the DVLA’s contract for IT services.

Ravi acted for the Claimant in a case concerning the definition of a “medicinal product” under the Medicines Directive and the duties of the MHRA to apply the so-called functional test in a consistent fashion to like products (with Thomas de la Mare QC).

Ravi successfully represented the Arts Council in resisting a judicial review concerning a highly valuable painting attributed to the Italian artist Giotto di Bondone, following the Arts Council’s refusal to issue an export licence. This was the first case concerning Council Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 on the export of cultural goods in the UK. The Court accepted the Art Council’s interpretation of the meaning of “lawful and definitive dispatch from another Member State” in Article 2(2)(b) of that Regulation.

Ravi acted successfully for the Interested Party in judicial review proceedings concerning the hybrid abridged procedure for authorisation of medicinal products under article 10(3) of the Medicinal Code.

Ravi acted successfully for two entities in challenging their listing by the European Council on the EU’s sanctions list relating to the Syrian regime. The entities were entirely removed from the EU’s lists.

Ravi appeared on behalf of Amazon, led by James Segan KC, in a dispute regarding RAND terms for a licence to standard essential and non-essential patents. A case summary may be found here.

Ravi acts for Lenovo in successfully resisting InterDigital’s applications to challenge the Court’s jurisdiction.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in successfully resisting InterDigital’s applications contesting the Court’s jurisdiction. The Court found that there is a reasonable prospect of success that Lenovo is entitled to a FRAND licence in respect of InterDigital’s entire portfolio of patents, finding that it may be discriminatory for InterDigital to offer a SEP-only licence to Lenovo if it offered licences covering its entire portfolio to other licensees.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in their application for declarations that the terms of a draft interim licence would be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") pending the final FRAND trial between the parties. The Court also considered (and dismissed) InterDigital's application for a case management stay in favour of patent infringement proceedings in the Regional Court of Munich.

Ravi is acting for the Defendants in only the fourth substantive FRAND dispute to go to trial before the English Courts. The dispute concerns InterDigital’s global Standard Essential Patent (“SEP”) portfolio.

Ravi acted for the Defendants in these international telecoms patent infringement and FRAND proceedings.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in a dispute concerning InterDigital’s global Standard Essential Patent (“SEP”) portfolio. The decision is one of only a handful in the world to reach a final determination in a FRAND dispute and reinforces the world-leading role of the English courts in this field. InterDigital’s appeal and Lenovo’s cross-appeal against this decision are due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in June 2024.

Ravi acted for the CAA in relation to an appeal under s. 25 of the Civil Aviation Act 2012, with Heathrow Airport Ltd alleging that the CAA had set the price cap too low, and the airlines alleging that the CAA had set the price cap too high. The CMA held that the CAA was not wrong in most of the decisions that were appealed.

Ravi acted for the PGA European Tour at both the initial hearing and appeal before an Appeal Panel appointed by Sport Resolutions. The case concerned the suspensions of the professional golfers Ian Poulter, Adrian Otaegui, Justin Harding and others from playing in the Scottish Open and two other DP World Tour co-sanctioned tournaments. Their suspensions were initially stayed pending the determination of the golfers’ appeals. The Sports Resolutions Appeal Panel dismissed the appeals, upholding the original fines.

Ravi is part of the counsel team which continues to represent the Competition & Markets Authority, which was the respondent in these appeals against its decision to fine GSK in relation to its agreements with certain  generic  companies concerning  the  terms  on  which  the parties  settled expected or ongoing patent litigation relating to paroxetine (supplied in the UK as Seroxat, an antidepressant medicine). The case required the CAT to consider the interpretation and application of the principles of market definition, restrictions by object and effect as well as one of the first instances of the ‘hot-tubbing’ of economic experts before the CAT. Following a lengthy trial, the CAT has referred questions to the CJEU on Articles 101 and 102 TFEU.

Ravi is instructed to advise FX claimants in relation to substantial claims, which it is anticipated will be brought in the course of the year.

Ravi was instructed (with Thomas de la Mare QC and Andrew Scott) on a substantial damages claim pending in the High Court arising from a cartel in the air cargo sector. The claim raises novel questions of jurisdiction and applicable law as well as the application of economic torts in cartel cases.

Ravi was instructed by a claimant industrial manufacturer in a damages claim in the Commercial Court (with Kieron Beal QC, Fraser Campbell and Tom Cleaver).

Advising the Competition Commission on the scope of its investigative powers (with James Eadie QC).

Ravi acted for OFCOM in successfully resisting this appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal concerning the remedies imposed in its Business Connectivity Market Review (March 2013).

Ravi acted successfully for OFCOM in this reference to the Competition Commission concerning the allocation of common costs to Traditional Interface (TI) circuit.

Ravi acted for the AIRE Centre, as Intervener in an appeal concerning the payment of the care component of disability living allowance (as well as certain Withdrawal Act issues).

Ravi acted for the Electoral Commission in an appeal brought by Vote Leave, the designated lead campaigner for the "leave" outcome in the 2016 EU referendum, against the decision of the Electoral Commission to publish a report of its investigation into suspected breaches of electoral legislation. 

Ravi acted successfully for the Claimant in the third EU law challenge to the UK’s ongoing failure to meet air quality standards in 45 local authority areas across England and in Wales, raising issues concerning effective domestic remedies for breaches of EU Directives.

In its judgment, the Court ordered a new remedy for the first time in judicial review proceedings: liberty to apply extending to the lawfulness of the supplemental Air Quality Plan for England, published in October 2018.

Ravi acted alongside others for the applicants in this case concerning the compatibility of the UK’s bulk surveillance regime with the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”).

Ravi acted as junior counsel for Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar in this challenge to the legality of Part 3 of the Finance Act 2013 for alleged incompatibility with EU law (with Lord Pannick QC). The High Court referred fundamental questions of EU law to the CJEU, including a question relating to the constitutional status of Gibraltar in EU law which was determined by the Grand Chamber.

Advising a pharmaceutical company on a public law challenge to funding decisions within the NHS (with Thomas de la Mare QC).

Ravi advised the Public Law Project and thirteen other NGOs as to the legality of the proposed residence test for legal aid (led by Michael Fordham QC and Ben Jaffey). The advice was publicly disclosed and published in the Legal Aid Reforms special edition of Judicial Review (JR Vol 18, Issue 3, September 2013, pp.219-222).

Successfully challenging the expulsion of a student from a Sixth Form college for comments posted on social media, before an Independent Review Panel.

Successful claim for a writ of habeas corpus in respect of Yunus Rahmatullah, a detainee held by the US Government at Bagram in Afghanistan (assisting Ben Jaffey).

Successfully defending a challenge to the lawfulness of knife crime ‘stop and search’ powers (assisting Ben Jaffey).

Successfully defending an appeal to the Court of Appeal on the positive duties of investigation owed by public authorities under article 3 ECHR to prisoners assaulted in prison (assisting Kate Gallafent QC).

Ravi acted successfully for the Interested Party in judicial review proceedings concerning the hybrid abridged procedure for authorisation of medicinal products under article 10(3) of the Medicinal Code. The case raised novel questions of EU law concerning the reliance upon data previously submitted by a separate generic manufacturer.

Ravi acts for the claimants in a challenge to retrospective legislation passed to validate the Government’s ‘back to work’ schemes after these were held to be ultra vires by the Supreme Court in October 2013 ([2013] UKSC 68; [2013] 3 W.L.R. 1276) . The High Court granted a declaration of incompatibility on Article 6(1) ECHR grounds ([2014] EWHC 2182 (Admin); [2015] Q.B. 573). The Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by the Secretary of State on Article 6(1) and a cross-appeal by the Claimants on Article 1 of the First Protocol.

Ravi acted as junior counsel for Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar in this high profile case concerning a challenge to the compatibility of the Gambling Act 2005, as amended, with EU law. The case raised complex issues concerning the constitutional status of Gibraltar under EU law.

Ravi acted for third party interveners, Save the Children, in this high-profile climate change case before the European Court of Human Rights.

Ravi acted for the Interested Party, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, in this case concerning a request by a fertility clinic and NHS Trust to contact an egg donor, many years after the donation, to seek her agreement to undergo genetic testing.

Ravi acted pro bono with REDRESS for Mr al-Hawsawi before the European Court of Human Rights in a case concerning the rendition and conditions of detention in Lithuania of a so-called “High-Value Detainee” in Guantánamo Bay.

Ravi acted for World Athletics in its intervention in this case before the Grand Chamber of the European Court, relating to the rights of so-called “DSD athletes” to compete in female-only athletics events.

Ravi acted for the Interested Party, the HFEA, in this case which considered the statutory requirement, under s.12(1)(c) and Schedule 3, paragraph 1(1) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. In a high-profile judgment, the Family Court granted a declaration that it would be lawful for the Applicant, Mr Jennings, to use an embryo created using his sperm and the eggs of his late wife, in treatment with a surrogate, notwithstanding the absence of her written, signed consent to that effect.

Ravi acted for the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and the Chair-Rapporteur of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in the first intervention by UN Special Rapporteurs before the Supreme Court or the House of Lords. This leading case concerned questions of the law of state immunity as well as the Foreign Act of State doctrine in the context of claims against senior British officials made by two Libyan victims of 'extraordinary rendition' . The Supreme  Court held that the claimants’ allegations of kidnap and torture must be heard at trial in the English courts.

Ravi acted alongside others for the applicants in this case concerning the compatibility of the UK’s bulk surveillance regime with the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”).

Ravi acted for the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and the Chair of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in the first ever intervention before the Supreme Court or House of Lords by a UN Mandate-Holder. The claim has been brought against HM Government, Jack Straw MP and MI6 senior official by Libyan family subject to ‘extraordinary rendition’ from the Far East to Gaddafi’s Libya. It raised significant issues concerning the Foreign Act of State doctrine and State Immunity, as well as the international responsibility of States for acts of their agents in collaboration with agents of other States.

Ravi is acting for a so-called “High-Value Detainee” in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba who is bringing a claim in the European Court of Human Rights against the Lithuanian State for complicity in the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program from approximately 2005-2006. The claim raises important issues concerning the right to life (prohibition of the death penalty), the prohibitions of torture and arbitrary detention, the right to a fair trial, the right to private family life and the right to an effective remedy.

Ravi acts for the claimants in a challenge to retrospective legislation passed to validate the Government’s ‘back to work’ schemes after these were held to be ultra vires by the Supreme Court in October 2013 ([2013] UKSC 68; [2013] 3 W.L.R. 1276) . The High Court granted a declaration of incompatibility on Article 6(1) ECHR grounds ([2014] EWHC 2182 (Admin); [2015] Q.B. 573). The Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by the Secretary of State on Article 6(1) and a cross-appeal by the Claimants on Article 1 of the First Protocol.

Ravi acts for three of the UK’s leading privacy groups (Big Brother Watch, Open Rights Group, and English PEN) and a prominent German internet campaigner (Constanze Kurz) in a high-profile application to the European Court of Human Rights challenging the UK’s legislation governing the surveillance of communications, following the disclosures by Edward Snowden. The case led to an exceptional oral hearing before the Court in Strasbourg in November 2017. The Judgment of the First Section on 13 September 2018 upheld the complaint on Article 8 ECHR grounds. An appeal to the Grand Chamber of the Court was heard on 10 July 2019 at another exceptional oral hearing. Judgment is awaited.

Ravi acted for the fourth to sixth interveners, in an appeal to the Supreme Court raising the question of the compatibility of Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which contains powers to stop, search and detain persons without “reasonable suspicion”, with the common law and European Convention Rights of liberty of the person and personal privacy .

Successful appeal (acting pro bono) for claimants in First-Tier and Upper Tribunal proceedings raising Chen, Zambrano and Article 8 ECHR issues.

Intervened on behalf of Dignity and Choice in Dying in this four-day appeal to a 9-judge panel of the Supreme Court. Concerned the question of the degree of guidance which the DPP must provide to the public regarding her policy on whether to consent to the institution of prosecutions for the crime of ‘assistance or encouragement’ of suicide.

Ravi acted for the claimants in claims concerning the lawfulness of extra-judicial detention by the UK armed forces in Afghanistan (led by Michael Fordham QC Shaheed Fatima, Hanif Mussa and Paul Luckhurst).

An investigation into PSR issues regarding a Premier League club.

A CAS dispute between a Premier League Club and a former Player.

Ravi acted for the PGA European Tour at both the initial hearing and appeal before an Appeal Panel appointed by Sport Resolutions. The case concerned the suspensions of the professional golfers Ian Poulter, Adrian Otaegui, Justin Harding and others from playing in the Scottish Open and two other DP World Tour co-sanctioned tournaments. Their suspensions were initially stayed pending the determination of the golfers’ appeals. The Sports Resolutions Appeal Panel dismissed the appeals, upholding the original fines.

Ravi has undertaken regulatory investigations in the sport sector.

Ravi acted for British 100m sprinter CJ Ujah concerning an Anti-Doping Rule Violation at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. The AIU and Wada were satisfied that the Anti-Doping Rule Violation was not intentional but the result of Mr Ujah’s ingestion of a contaminated supplement.

Acting for an amateur rugby player in an anti-doping appeal.

Ravi acted alongside Nick De Marco QC for Fulham in its claim for compensation for the training and development of Harvey Elliot following his move to Liverpool. The PFCC awarded a record breaking amount of compensation to Fulham for a 16-year old player.

Ravi acted alongside Nick De Marco QC for the Professional Footballers Association (instructed by Mills & Reeve) in its arbitral challenge to the English Football League’s (EFL) League 1 and League 2 Player Salary Caps – the first salary caps to be introduced in European football. 

Advising a Premier League Club on EU free movement rules and their impact on compensation for a player transfer.

Ravi successfully acted for the GFA in its efforts to secure admission as a member of FIFA before CAS (with Adam Lewis QC).

Ravi acted as junior counsel for the First Claimant, the well-known boxing promoter and manager in his dispute with the boxer, Ricky Burns, concerning unpaid management commission, quantum meruit, and breach of contract (with Ian Mill QC).

Advising an association of players on a potential challenge to a sporting body’s decision to alter its constitution and decision-making powers.

Assisting Kate Gallafent QC in her role as the sole arbitrator in Olympic Selection Appeals by athletes in the run-up to the London 2012 Olympics.

Acting for the owner of racing stables in a claim for discrimination, redundancy and unfair dismissal by a former employee (November 2013).

Acting for a football agent in a FAPL Rule K arbitration against a Premiership footballer in a claim for non-payment of commission (with Nick de Marco).

Ravi acted as junior counsel for the former F1 Team Principal in a substantial high court claim for commission against the F1 team (with Nick de Marco).

Acting for a football agent in a FAPL Rule K arbitration against a Premiership footballer in a claim for non-payment of fees (with Jane Mulcahy QC).

Ravi acted successfully for the Claimant in this dispute over breach of a Media Rights agreement relating to the broadcasting of international and domestic cricket matches in New Zealand. Summary judgment was obtained on the substantial debt claim before the Commercial Court in London.

Ravi acted for the FA in one of the most high profile sporting  disputes in the last year. In the so-called ‘poppy case’, FIFA initiated disciplinary proceedings against the English and Scottish FAs with regard to a number of alleged incidents at a World Cup 2018 qualifying match. The case involved significant press coverage, which ultimately led to FIFA and IFAB (the rule-setting body for football) amending the Rules of the Game to permit the Poppy to be displayed.

Ravi acted for an amateur rugby player charged with an anti-doping violation by the RFU, in an appeal before an RFU Appeal Board. The case gave rise to an important issue concerning the state of mind required to be found guilty of the ordinary anti-doping violation and also the test for No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Ravi appeared on behalf of the Second and Third Respondents, the Ministry of Justice and the Judicial College, in a case concerning the application of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) to information held by the independent judiciary. The decision confirmed the constitutional status of the Judicial College following the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and the exclusion of information held by or on behalf of the judiciary from the FOIA regime.

Ravi acted for the Ministry of Justice and the Judicial Office in an appeal seeking disclosure of the index (‘site map’) to the content available on the judicial intranet under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The Tribunal confirmed that the information requested was held on behalf of the judiciary and fell outside the Act.

Ravi acted for the Department for Health and Social Care in an appeal to the Upper Tribunal concerning section 35 of FOIA.

Ravi acted for the Department for Health and Social Care in an appeal arising out a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the disclosure of the contents of the diary of the then Secretary of State for Health, the Rt. Hon Jeremy Hunt MP

Ravi acted for the Department of Health in an appeal arising out a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 by the second respondent, Mr Simon Lewis, a journalist, for the disclosure of the contents of the Ministerial diary of the Rt. Hon Andrew Lansley MP.

Ravi acts for three of the UK’s leading privacy groups (Big Brother Watch, Open Rights Group, and English PEN) and a prominent German internet campaigner (Constanze Kurz) in a high-profile application to the European Court of Human Rights challenging the UK’s legislation governing the surveillance of communications, following the disclosures by Edward Snowden. The case led to an exceptional oral hearing before the Court in Strasbourg in November 2017. The Judgment of the First Section on 13 September 2018 upheld the complaint on Article 8 ECHR grounds. An appeal to the Grand Chamber of the Court was heard on 10 July 2019 at another exceptional oral hearing. Judgment is awaited.

Ravi is acting for Open Rights Group and Privacy International as interveners in these high-profile proceedings concerning the compatibility of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 with EU law and the ECHR. The Divisional Court ([2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin); [2016] 1 C.M.L.R. 13) declared that that s.1 of the Act is inconsistent with EU law and granted a suspended order disapplying the provision. On appeal, the Court of Appeal referred a number of questions to the CJEU on the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment on the Data Retention Directive in Joined Cases C-293/12 and 594/12 Digital Rights Ireland.

Ravi acted for Open Rights Group and Privacy International as interveners before the Hungarian Constitutional Court in Dojcsak v Telenor Magyarország Zrt, in a case concerning bulk data retention and a challenge following the CJEU’s decision in Digital Rights Ireland.

Advising a telecommunications operator as to data protection and retention legislation (assisting Kieron Beal QC).

Ravi is acting for the Department of Health in this appeal concerning the application of the Freedom of Information Act to the disclosure of ministerial diaries, following the Lewis case. The claim raises important questions about the type of evidence necessary in these appeals, and the appropriate balancing exercise of public interests at play, when this form of information is involved.

Ravi is instructed by the Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah in a ground-breaking civil claim which arose out of the illness and premature death of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, and which included alleged breaches of Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR.

Advising in relation to marine conservation issues.

Ravi acted on behalf of the family in this landmark case, where H.M. Assistant Coroner for Inner South London concluded that Ella died at 9 years of age from acute respiratory failure, asthma and “air pollution exposure”.

Ravi acted successfully for the Claimant in the third EU law challenge to the UK’s ongoing failure to meet air quality standards in 45 local authority areas across England and in Wales, raising issues concerning effective domestic remedies for breaches of EU Directives.

In its judgment, the Court ordered a new remedy for the first time in judicial review proceedings: liberty to apply extending to the lawfulness of the supplemental Air Quality Plan for England, published in October 2018.

Ravi acted successfully in an EU law challenge to the UK’s failure to meet air quality standards in London and other major urban areas, raising issues concerning effective domestic remedies for breaches of EU Directives. The Court ordered a full reconsideration of the air quality plans for the entire country..

Ravi appeared on behalf of Amazon, led by James Segan KC, in a dispute regarding RAND terms for a licence to standard essential and non-essential patents. A case summary may be found here.

Ravi acts for Lenovo in successfully resisting InterDigital’s applications to challenge the Court’s jurisdiction.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in successfully resisting InterDigital’s applications contesting the Court’s jurisdiction. The Court found that there is a reasonable prospect of success that Lenovo is entitled to a FRAND licence in respect of InterDigital’s entire portfolio of patents, finding that it may be discriminatory for InterDigital to offer a SEP-only licence to Lenovo if it offered licences covering its entire portfolio to other licensees.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in their application for declarations that the terms of a draft interim licence would be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") pending the final FRAND trial between the parties. The Court also considered (and dismissed) InterDigital's application for a case management stay in favour of patent infringement proceedings in the Regional Court of Munich.

Ravi is acting for the Defendants in only the fourth substantive FRAND dispute to go to trial before the English Courts. The dispute concerns InterDigital’s global Standard Essential Patent (“SEP”) portfolio.

Ravi acted for the Defendants in these international telecoms patent infringement and FRAND proceedings.

Ravi acted for Lenovo in a dispute concerning InterDigital’s global Standard Essential Patent (“SEP”) portfolio. The decision is one of only a handful in the world to reach a final determination in a FRAND dispute and reinforces the world-leading role of the English courts in this field. InterDigital’s appeal and Lenovo’s cross-appeal against this decision are due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in June 2024.

Ravi is acting for Open Rights Group and Privacy International as interveners in these high-profile proceedings concerning the compatibility of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 with EU law and the ECHR. The Divisional Court ([2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin); [2016] 1 C.M.L.R. 13) declared that that s.1 of the Act is inconsistent with EU law and granted a suspended order disapplying the provision. On appeal, the Court of Appeal referred a number of questions to the CJEU on the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment on the Data Retention Directive in Joined Cases C-293/12 and 594/12 Digital Rights Ireland.

Advising PhonepayPlus on its update of the Code of Practice.

Ravi acted for OFCOM in successfully resisting this appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal concerning the remedies imposed in its Business Connectivity Market Review (March 2013).

Ravi acted successfully for OFCOM in this reference to the Competition Commission concerning the allocation of common costs to Traditional Interface (TI) circuit.

Advising a telecommunications operator as to data protection and retention legislation (assisting Kieron Beal QC).

Ravi represented Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Limited in this appeal raising important issues as to the jurisdiction of the court to determine the validity of foreign patents, relating to the Moçambique principle, derived from British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602 and the foreign act of state doctrine.

Ravi is part of the counsel team which continues to represent the Competition & Markets Authority, which was the respondent in these appeals against its decision to fine GSK in relation to its agreements with certain  generic  companies concerning  the  terms  on  which  the parties  settled expected or ongoing patent litigation relating to paroxetine (supplied in the UK as Seroxat, an antidepressant medicine). The case required the CAT to consider the interpretation and application of the principles of market definition, restrictions by object and effect as well as one of the first instances of the ‘hot-tubbing’ of economic experts before the CAT. Following a lengthy trial, the CAT has referred questions to the CJEU on Articles 101 and 102 TFEU.

Ravi acted successfully for two entities in challenging their listing by the European Council on the EU’s sanctions list relating to the Syrian regime. The entities were entirely removed from the EU’s lists.