Case Reports

HHJ Birss sees through Bristan’s excuses

This case ([2013] EWPCC 2), heard in the Patents County Court, concerns designs for electric shower units. Mira (the claimant) alleged that the Glee, Joy and Smile products, supplied by the defendant...

Preventing use of disclosure outside litigation - appropriate undertakings for the confidentiality club

Over the past few months two actions concerning the validity and infringement of IPCom’s European Patent EP 1,841,268 (IPCom v Nokia (Claim No: HC 10 C01233) and HTC v IPCom (Claim HC 11 C02064))...

Losing the Right to Use Your Own Name – The Cipriani Saga

In October 2008 a factually complex trade mark infringement and passing off case, involving the interpretation of agreements under Italian Law, came before Mr Justice Arnold (Hotel Cipriani SRL & Ors...

CJEU decides on “business as usual” after ONE-L of a fight

Leno Merken BV v Hagelkruis Beheer BV (ONEL / OMEL)A test case cooked up by Benelux attorneys called into question one of the central tenets of the CTM system - that use of a CTM in just one member...

Darren Smyth makes inaugural post as IPKat blogger

Partner Darren Smyth has made his first blog post for The IPKat following the announcement that he had become a full member of The IPKat team.

Obvious to try in all but name?

The applicability of the obvious to try question has been a thorny issue in UK patent law for some time, and the desire for a party seeking invalidity to apply this test has pervaded many recent...

ZYNGA hit triple word score as Mattel’s Scrabble tile claim fails

(1) J.W. Spear & Sons Ltd (2) Mattel, Inc. & (3) Mattel UK Limited -and- ZYNGA, Inc. [2012] EWHC 3345 (Ch) – 28 November 2012.Arnold J’s summary dismissal of an infringement claim based on a UK trade...

Court of Appeal puts an end to lawyers creating confusion

In Marks and Spencer Plc v Interflora Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 1501, the Court of Appeal has effectively killed off what was a common place practice of adducing favourable evidence of confusion (or lack...

Needles in the UK Patents County Court

Liversidge v (1) Owen Mumford Limited (2) Abbott Laboratories LimitedIn April 2011, the claimant commenced patent infringement proceedings in the UK Patents County Court (“PCC”) against the...

High Court confirms that it is not fine for Spicerhaart to continue using “FINE”

A recent decision of the High Court has brought to a conclusion a dispute between Fine & Country Limited (F&C) and Okotoks Limited (formerly Spicerhaart Limited and part of the Spicerhaart Group of...

Antibody claims held sufficient, but how valuable will they be?

In the latest Eli Lilly v HGS ruling, the Court of Appeal has found HGS antibody claims to be sufficient, given the Supreme Court has already held the claims to be capable of industrial applicability.

SPCs for Antibodies: A CJEU reference probably but not immediately

The Patents Court has issued another judgment expressing dissatisfaction with the CJEU’s ruling in Medeva (C-322/10). In particular, the Court has held that in order to determine if a particular...

No way Round BMW’s rights – upgrade is not repair

A High Court decision last month has provided guidance on how Article 110(1) of the Community Designs Regulation 6/2002/EC, which relates to the protection of designs for component parts of complex...

Confusion in the marketplace: “Woolley” licences and misrepresentation

Woolley v Ultimate Products Ltd[2012] EWCA Civ 1038 (26 July 2012)Upholding a decision of the High Court, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of a licence, consumer confusion “the wrong way”...

Three new UK IPO decisions demonstrate the wide commercial applicability of registered designs

In the UK, applications to declare a UK registered design invalid can be filed at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO), whereupon the case is decided by a Hearing Officer of the UKIPO acting...