Preview: An interview with Richard Arnold

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Preview: An interview with Richard Arnold

arnold-600.jpg

UK High Court judge Mr Justice Arnold speaks about how judges can set the agenda and dealing with obfuscating counsel in an exclusive interview with Managing IP

UK High Court judge Richard Arnold says he believes judges are not only required to interpret the law but to also create new laws and precedents, in a wide-ranging interview where he talks to Managing IP about his approach to cases, how to spot a badly prepared case and his views of counsel from the bench.

Asked whether judges are merely arbiters or if they can take on the role of influencer, he says that of course judges make laws. This is done through incremental developments of common law and interpretation of statutes.

He references website-blocking cases as an example – in which internet service providers were ordered to block access to websites hosting copyright-protected content and later trademark-infringing material as well.

“It so happened that it fell onto me to pioneer and develop the remedy of website blocking in this jurisdiction,” he says, adding that he set the agenda on this remedy for IP owners by chance. “I had no notion that that was what I was going to be doing until it was brought before me,” he says. “I found myself not so much developing an area of law as creating it.”

Echoing old comments made by Lord Reid, he says: “The idea that judges don’t make laws is a fairy tale, and we don’t believe in fairy tales anymore.

Cross-border collaboration is also increasingly common, Arnold says. He notes that foreign case law – particularly judgments from the Netherlands and Germany – have been quite influential and that judgments from courts in England and Wales are also assessed overseas.

The full-length interview, in which Arnold also shares his views on what in-house counsel can do better; the judicial recruitment crisis and why he does not consider himself to be a “judicial superman”, will be published on Managing IP and Patent Strategy shortly.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
A boom in transactional work and a heightened awareness of IP have helped boost revenue for the rebranded commercial services team
Clemens Heusch, head of global litigation and dispute resolution at Nokia, tells us why open conversations – and respectful challenges – lead to the best results
Siegmund Gutman, who joined Mintz one year ago, explains the firm’s approach to life sciences litigation and what it means for hiring plans
The merger of two IP boutiques could prompt others to follow suit and challenge Australia’s externally funded firms
Gift this article