Key Points
- Oxford Nanopore Technologies has sued Shenzhen-based MGI Tech in London over allegations linked to sequencing trade secrets and confidential information.
- The dispute is part of a wider legal fight involving BGI Group, MGI Holdings, and related entities in England and Wales.
- Oxford Nanopore says the case concerns alleged misuse of confidential information, breach of confidence, breach of contract, and trade secret claims.
- The company also indicated claims connected to patent rights and licences in earlier filings and reporting.
- The case adds to ongoing international litigation involving the same companies, including related proceedings outside the UK.
Oxford (Oxford Daily)May 25, 2026-Oxford Nanopore Technologies has brought legal action in London against Shenzhen-based MGI Tech, escalating a long-running dispute over sequencing technology, confidential information and trade secrets. The dispute sits within a broader conflict between Oxford Nanopore and a cluster of China-linked genomics companies including BGI Group, MGI Holdings and other related entities.
As reported by the outlets covering the matter, Oxford Nanopore’s claims centre on allegations that confidential information and trade secrets were misused in the development of competing sequencing products. The company has also said the case involves breach of contract and related duties of confidence under UK law.
What are the allegations in the case?
Oxford Nanopore’s legal claims reportedly include breach of contractual obligations, breach of common law obligations of confidence, and breach of duties under the Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018. Reporting also says the company is pursuing an entitlement claim to a licence of certain patents.
According to the coverage, Oxford Nanopore alleges that BGI and related companies used its technology in developing a competing product, the Cyclone Seq sequencer, along with associated flow cells and consumables. The company has also alleged that it provided access to its technology only under specific restrictions and that those limits were not respected.
Which companies are involved?
The reporting identifies MGI Tech, MGI Holdings, BGI Group, BGI Tech Solutions, Beijing Genomics Institute at Shenzhen, and other affiliated entities among the companies drawn into the wider dispute. Oxford Nanopore’s filings and notices have referred to multiple parties rather than one isolated defendant, suggesting the matter involves a broader corporate network.
The case matters because both sides operate in the fast-moving field of gene sequencing, where commercial advantage depends heavily on proprietary methods, patents and technical know-how. That makes the dispute more than a routine corporate disagreement; it goes to the heart of how highly specialised biotech products are developed and protected.
What does the wider legal picture look like?
The London case is not the only proceeding linked to the dispute. Oxford Nanopore has also been involved in related legal action outside the UK, including proceedings referenced in Australia in February 2026. Earlier reporting also noted that Oxford Nanopore had been preparing or intending to file claims in England and Wales before the London action moved forward.
That wider context suggests the dispute has developed into a multi-jurisdictional battle involving intellectual property, contracts and confidential business information. The continuing use of courts in different countries indicates that the companies are fighting on both legal and commercial fronts.
Why does this matter for biotech?
The case highlights how central trade secrets remain in the biotechnology industry, especially in sequencing technologies where product development can be expensive and technically complex. It also shows how allegations of misuse can quickly turn into cross-border litigation when companies operate through international subsidiaries and affiliates.
For businesses in the sector, the dispute is a reminder that access agreements, licence terms and confidentiality controls can become decisive evidence in court. For investors and customers, it raises questions about product provenance, competitive conduct and the stability of long-term commercial partnerships.
Background of the development
Oxford Nanopore and BGI-related companies have been in dispute for some time, with reporting in 2024 saying Oxford Nanopore was preparing claims in the courts of England and Wales and seeking supporting subpoenas in the United States. Later reporting confirmed that the London legal action had been issued and that it concerned alleged trade secret infringement, breach of confidence and breach of contract.
The background to the case is the competition between companies developing nanopore and related sequencing systems, where patents, know-how and confidential design details can be commercially critical. This is why the legal fight has expanded beyond a simple contractual disagreement and into claims over technology ownership and use.
Prediction: How could this affect biotech audiences?
For the biotech industry, the case may encourage stronger internal controls around technical data, employee access and licence compliance. Companies working in sequencing and adjacent fields may also become more cautious about collaborations that involve sensitive proprietary information.
For investors, the dispute could increase attention on legal risk when assessing genomics firms with international operations. For customers and research partners, it may lead to greater scrutiny of supply chains, product claims and the ownership of underlying technology.
