Insights & News
Search for Insights & News
- 73 results found
- All (83)
- Others (73)
- Press (6)
- Inbriefs (4)
-
Servicing trade mark infringement
22 June 2017The use of a third party trade mark to provide information or describe a service being offered does not necessarily constitute trade mark infringement. Where the use of a trademark goes beyond that and creates an impression in the average consumer that the particular serviced is authorised by the trade mark owner, this will constitute an infringement.
-
Service of a claim form on an agent - was it valid?
22 June 2017In a recent case the High Court considered as a preliminary issue whether a claimant had validly served a claim form on what they considered was the agent of the claimant. The rules of service require that the defendant must be served at the place within the jurisdiction where it conducts business, or where it carries on its activities and which has a real connection with the claim. Therefore the question here was whether the agent’s office was a place at which the defendant conducted its business, or where it carried on its activities?
-
Putting a squeeze on patent licences
20 June 2017The recent case of Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v UCB Pharma SA & Celltech R&D Ltd [2017] EWHC 216 (Pat)
-
Another purple patch for Trade Marks refused
12 May 2017In Glaxo v Sandoz the Court of Appeal has confirmed the invalidity of a trade mark for two shades of the colour purple relating to asthma inhalers.
-
Advocate General’s Opinion – Uber provides a transport service not an information society service
11 May 2017The Advocate General states the Uber is providing a transport service and it not acting as an electronic intermediary and providing an information society service. Uber therefore should have to comply with local laws for the licensing of taxi operators
-
Time to add more defendants?
21 April 2017In a recent decision the Court of Appeal has had to decide whether a claim for accessory liability against various companies was time barred. Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) Anor v Sandoz Ltd & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 22.
-
Marathon Asset misses the jackpot again
12 April 2017After being awarded only £2 in nominal damages in its breach of confidence case, Marathon Asset has been heavily penalised on costs after failing to accept the defendants’ Part 36 offer.
-
Court of Appeal confirms deterrent sentences for copyright infringement
30 March 2017In Regina v Evans the Court of Appeal has provided guidance on the appropriate level of sentencing for criminal offences under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The Court of Appeal confirmed that the sentence should have a deterrent effect.
-
It’s obvious, patents are not child’s play!
28 March 2017In a recent decision the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court had to consider whether a patent for a children’s toy consisting of water soluble, fusible, translucent beads was merely an aesthetic creation, and therefore excluded from patentability and if not, whether the patent claims lacked an inventive step and were obvious. If the patent was valid, the Court also had to determine whether it was infringed by the Defendant’s product.
-
Bad timing for a counterclaim
27 February 2017The provisions of section 35(3) of the Limitation Act 1980 will not enable a defendant to bring counterclaim that would otherwise be time barred before the proceedings had commenced.
-
Court considers service of a defendant’s notice to force claimant to serve proceedings or discontinue a claim
14 February 2017A recent decision not only reminds practitioners of a defendant’s ability to force a claimant to either serve proceedings or discontinue a claim by using a CPR 7.7(1) notice, but also considers for the first time the date for compliance with such a notice.
-
Legal advice privilege: Not as wide as you think?
08 February 2017Who is a lawyer’s client and what type of communications are protected for the purposes of legal advice privilege have been the subject of two recent important High Court decisions. These cases make it clear that not all communications between lawyers and a client’s employees will be protected by legal advice privilege, even if the communication took place to allow legal advice to be given.
-
Does a solicitor own the goodwill associated with their own name?
01 February 2017In (1) Juthika Bhayani and (2) Bhayani Law Limited v Taylor Bracewell LLP this question was considered by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court.