Download now: LIFE SCIENCES WHITEPAPER - BUILDING AN INVESTABLE IP PORTFOLIO
​

EIP Trademark team recognised by WTR 1000 2021

No items found.
​
February 16, 2021
Additional information
Chevron icon
Info
Tags
Trademarking
Table of contents
Chevron icon
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

EIP has been highlighted as one of the world’s leading trademark specialists in the 2021 edition of WTR 1000.

Researchers for WTR 1000, published annually by World Trademark Review, references EIP’s international offices which puts it at a distinct advantage on cross-border trademark protection and litigation assignments. The team is noted for its clear communication and knowledge sharing between its various offices ensure a seamless service without limits.

Head of Brands Claire Lehr is noted as providing “critical information along with long-range strategic guidance regarding the protection of existing brand assets and the development of new ones”.

WTR 1000 notes that Claire and fellow partner Paula Flutter form a great team, with valuable contributions from seasoned associate Nora Fowler.

Recent Case Reports

See all Case Reports

No language change at Central Division
08 October 2026
Proceedings before the UPC Central Division must be conducted in the language in which the patent was granted. There is no legal basis to change that language. In a revocation action concerning a German-language patent, the Paris Central Division rejected a request to switch the language of proceedings to English, and also rejected a subsidiary request to allow written submissions in English and hold the hearing in English, holding that Article 49(6) UPCA permits no derogation and reflects a deliberate legislative choice.
​
Criteria for obtaining an order to produce evidence under Rule 190
07 October 2026
This appeal judgment clarifies that Rule 190 orders to produce evidence require three cumulative conditions: specificity, necessity and proportionality, and cannot be used for fishing expeditions. The Court of Appeal confirmed that first instance judges enjoy a broad margin of discretion when assessing such requests, and upheld the order requiring production of two fabric samples for ballistic testing. Both the appeal and the cross-appeal were dismissed.
​
Court of Appeal focuses on the technical effect to determine added matter
30 September 2026
The Court of Appeal provided guidance on their approach to assessing added subject matter, highlighting that the technical effect underlying the invention and how the claimed and unclaimed features contribute thereto is central to the analysis.
​