Search Results for: Trade Marks Act 1994 11

Click the case name for better results:

Elizabeth Emanuel, Elizabeth Emanuel Double E Crown Device (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 27 Jun 2003

IPO The Hearing Officer in the above proceedings found for Continental Shelf 128 Limited. (Decisions dated 17 October 2002 (BL O/424/02 and BL O/425/02). Ms Emanuel appealed to the Appointed Person. Subsequently, Continental Shelf 128 Ltd (CSL) requested that the two appeals be referred to the High Court.The Appointed Person considered his powers to refer … Continue reading Elizabeth Emanuel, Elizabeth Emanuel Double E Crown Device (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 27 Jun 2003

Orbis Risk Management Others (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 25 Apr 2003

IPO Three separate oppositions, not consolidated, but as same issues involved only one decision. The opponents’ opposition was based on their ownership of registrations in Classes 9, 16, 35, 41 and 42 of their mark CORBIS. The opponents claimed use of their mark in relation to computer readable media from 1994 but only gave turnover … Continue reading Orbis Risk Management Others (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 25 Apr 2003

EE Elizabeth Emanuel (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 17 Oct 2002

IPO In the parallel opposition proceedings (BL O/024/02) which has been reviewed in some detail the Hearing Officer concluded that as Ms Emanuel had assigned rights in this mark together with the goodwill in the business to the present proprietors, opposition under Section 3(3)(b) – which is the equivalent to Section 46(1)(d) in revocation proceedings … Continue reading EE Elizabeth Emanuel (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 17 Oct 2002

Wackers (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 27 Nov 1998

cw Inter Partes Decisions – Trade Marks – Opposition – The opponents filed evidence to say that they had first commenced to use the mark WACKERS from 1993 and goods (a game known as ‘Pogs’) were sold in the USA through such companies as Walmart during 1994 and 1995. The goods were also exhibited at … Continue reading Wackers (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 27 Nov 1998

Re Trade Marks Act 1994 Trade Marks Nos 1338514 (in Class 5) and 1402537 (in Class 3) in the name of Laboratories Goemar SA and Applications for Revocation thereof Nos 10073 and 10074 by La Mer Technology Inc: ChD 20 Jun 2003

A case had been referred to the court as to the interpetation of the articles in the Directive. The court replied asking whether the subsequent Ansul judgement answered the questions raised. Held: By agreement with the parties, only one of the questions was answered, and four remained. The court requested the European court to continue. … Continue reading Re Trade Marks Act 1994 Trade Marks Nos 1338514 (in Class 5) and 1402537 (in Class 3) in the name of Laboratories Goemar SA and Applications for Revocation thereof Nos 10073 and 10074 by La Mer Technology Inc: ChD 20 Jun 2003

Associated Newspapers Limited, Daily Mail and General Trust Plc v Express Newspapers (an Unlimited Company, Incorrectly Sued As Express Newspapers Limited): ChD 11 Jun 2003

The claimants sought to prevent the respondents from starting an evening newspaper entitled ‘THE MAIL’ as an infringement of their registered mark, and as passing off. In turn the defendant challenged the validity of the mark. Held: The word ‘Mail’ has not acquired a descriptive meaning, and nor is there any requirement in the law … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Limited, Daily Mail and General Trust Plc v Express Newspapers (an Unlimited Company, Incorrectly Sued As Express Newspapers Limited): ChD 11 Jun 2003

Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given oral evidence, and the Registrar contended that any further appeal to the High court should … Continue reading Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Future Publishing Ltd v The Edge Interactive Media Inc and Others: ChD 13 Jun 2011

The claimant said that the defendant had infriged its rights by the use of its logo on their publications. Judges: Proudman J Citations: [2011] EWHC 1489 (Ch) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd HL 1964 What is substantial copyingThe plaintiff alleged copying of their … Continue reading Future Publishing Ltd v The Edge Interactive Media Inc and Others: ChD 13 Jun 2011

Best Buy Co Inc and Another v Worldwide Sales Corporation Espana Sl: CA 24 May 2011

Appeal against dismissal of claim of trade mark infringement threats by the defendants’ lawyers. The court was asked to consider whether a letter, described as ‘the September letter’ was an actionable threat. Held: Lord Neuberger MR said: ‘In my view, insofar as such a question turns on the meaning of any particular passage in the … Continue reading Best Buy Co Inc and Another v Worldwide Sales Corporation Espana Sl: CA 24 May 2011

Harrison v Teton Valley Trading Co; Harrison’s Trade Mark Application (CHINAWHITE): CA 27 Jul 2004

The applicant had been an employee of the objector at their nightclub ‘Chinawhite’ and whose principal attraction was a cocktail of the same name. Employees signed a confidentiality agreement as to the recipe. Having left the employment, the appellant set up a company with a similar name and applied for the mark ‘CHINA WHITE’. The … Continue reading Harrison v Teton Valley Trading Co; Harrison’s Trade Mark Application (CHINAWHITE): CA 27 Jul 2004

Asprey and Garrard Ltd v WRA (Guns) Ltd and Another: CA 11 Oct 2001

The Asprey family had been in business for many years. Their business was incorporated, and later sold to the claimants. A member of the Asprey family sought to carry on new businesses through limited companies using the family name. Upon request, he changed the names to the names of the respondent companies. Later he left … Continue reading Asprey and Garrard Ltd v WRA (Guns) Ltd and Another: CA 11 Oct 2001

South Cone Incorporated v Bessant, Greensmith, House and Stringer (a Partnership) trading as ‘Reef’; REEF Trade Mark: ChD 24 Jul 2001

The applicants sought registration of the trade mark ‘Reef’ in connection with merchandising activities in classes 25 and 26 arising from their pop group of the same name. The challengers owned a trade mark ‘Reef Brazil’ in class 25 in relation to footwear, and claimed that there was a risk of confusion, and that if … Continue reading South Cone Incorporated v Bessant, Greensmith, House and Stringer (a Partnership) trading as ‘Reef’; REEF Trade Mark: ChD 24 Jul 2001

Sabel BV v Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport: ECJ 11 Nov 1997

The test of whether a sign is confusing is how the use of the sign would be perceived by the average consumer of the type of goods in question. ‘The likelihood of confusion must therefore be appreciated globally, taking into account all factors relevant to the circumstances of the case. That global appreciation of the … Continue reading Sabel BV v Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport: ECJ 11 Nov 1997

In Re ‘Swiss Miss’ Trademark: CA 20 Jul 1998

The test for confusion in Trade Marks context is wider than that for passing off. The use of a name which suggested manufacture in Switzerland when there was no connection with Switzerland, was misleading and deceptive and registration as trade mark was to be refused. Citations: Times 20-Jul-1998 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 11 Jurisdiction: … Continue reading In Re ‘Swiss Miss’ Trademark: CA 20 Jul 1998

Jonathan Ball, McDermot Will and Emery(A Firm) v The Eden Project Ltd, The Eden Trust: PatC 11 Apr 2001

One of two project developers registered a Trade Mark constituting the name of the proposed development in his own name. The assets were, as always intended, later transferred into the limited company, and the two developers were directors. It was held that company name could not be divorced entirely from its trading name, and the … Continue reading Jonathan Ball, McDermot Will and Emery(A Firm) v The Eden Project Ltd, The Eden Trust: PatC 11 Apr 2001

Wakefield and Another, Regina v: CACD 11 Aug 2004

Judges: Lord Justice Latham Mr Justice Grigson Sir Edwin Jowitt Citations: [2004] EWCA Crim 2278 Links: Bailii Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 92(1) 104(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.466414

Bessant and others v South Cone Incorporated; in re REEF Trade Mark: CA 28 May 2002

The Reef pop group applied to register ‘REEF’ for Classes 25 and 26 – e.g. T-shirts, badges, etc. South Cone opposed them as registered proprietors of ‘Reef Brazil’ for the footwear which also was included in Class 25. South’s reputation was primarily amongst surfers. The Hearing Officer conducted a ‘multi-factorial’ comparison, and rejected the opposition … Continue reading Bessant and others v South Cone Incorporated; in re REEF Trade Mark: CA 28 May 2002

Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs: SC 11 May 2016

The court was asked whether the appellant, Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd (formerly MyTravel Group plc), was entitled to recover, by way of input tax VAT charged by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in respect of services provided by PwC and paid for by Airtours. Held: The appeal was dismissed (Clarke and Carnwath LL dissenting) For the VAT to … Continue reading Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs: SC 11 May 2016

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 21 May 2013

Mark use in search engine was infringing use The claimant mark owner alleged that the defendant, in paying a search engine to use the claimants mark as a search keyword was infringing its rights. The defendant argued that the use of the same sign in different contexts could amount to a different and non-infringing use. … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 21 May 2013

British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: Admn 20 Apr 2011

The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to European law. Held: The request was refused. No obligation had yet fallen on the claimant, and the exact form and rules … Continue reading British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: Admn 20 Apr 2011

Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd: PC 27 Jun 1994

(New Zealand) The plaintiff, an MP, pursued a defamation case. The defendant wished to argue for the truth of what was said, and sought to base his argument on things said in Parliament. The plaintiff responded that this would be a breach of Parliamentary privilege. Held: A Defendant may not use libel proceedings to impugn … Continue reading Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd: PC 27 Jun 1994

Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

The claimant alleged infringement of his registered trade marks ‘Money Saving Expert’ and associated terms. The defendant operated a service trading as ‘Money Claiming Expert’. Both services included advising those who might wish to claim refunds from banks. The claimant sought summary judgment. Held: The defence as filed proposed no real defence,merely putting the claimant … Continue reading Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Premier Luggage and Bags Ltd v The Premier Company (UK) Ltd and Another: CA 26 Mar 2002

The owner of a registered trade mark ‘Premier’ sued for swing tags which carried the defendant’s full name ‘The Premier Company (UK) Ltd.’. Held: A trade mark use can fall within the scope of the Art 6.1 defence. There there was no passing off or Art.5.1(a) infringement in respect of these: ‘If the use by … Continue reading Premier Luggage and Bags Ltd v The Premier Company (UK) Ltd and Another: CA 26 Mar 2002

Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch: CA 7 Feb 2000

The registration of two trade marks (‘Budweiser’) with the identical names was against the Act since it would appear to encourage the very confusion the Act sought to avoid. Nevertheless, where there was genuine honest concurrent use, that use might justify registration. Clause 12 of the Act clearly envisaged honest concurrent use. Here the name … Continue reading Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch: CA 7 Feb 2000

Allied Domecq Spirits and Wine Ltd v Murray Mcdavid Ltd: SCS 9 Dec 1997

Old Trade Mark infringement cases are to be viewed only with great care; on balance of convenience, the use of trade marked place name is to be allowed. Citations: Times 09-Dec-1997 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 11(2)(b) Jurisdiction: Scotland Intellectual Property, Scotland Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77754

Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser Busch Inc: ChD 20 May 1998

It is possible to grant two identical trade marks in respect of beer where either there was no confusion, or an honest concurrent use could justify such double registrations. Citations: Times 20-May-1998 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 11 12(2) Cited by: Appeal from – Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik … Continue reading Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser Busch Inc: ChD 20 May 1998

Bravado Merchandising Services Ltd v Mainstream Publishing (Edinburgh) Ltd: SCS 1996

The petitioner was the proprietor of the trade mark Wet Wet Wet (the name of a popular music group). It was registered for (among other classes of goods) books. The defendant intended to publish a book about the group using ‘Wet Wet Wet’ as part of the title. Held: Distinguishing Mothercare, that that would be … Continue reading Bravado Merchandising Services Ltd v Mainstream Publishing (Edinburgh) Ltd: SCS 1996

Scandecor Development Ab v Scandecor Marketing Ltd and Another: ChD 9 Mar 1998

A company with same name as a registered trademark could trade under that name provided the use was honest and otherwise within the section. Citations: Times 09-Mar-1998, Gazette 25-Mar-1998, [1998] FSR 500 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 11(2)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Scandecor Development Ab v Scandecor Marketing Ab and … Continue reading Scandecor Development Ab v Scandecor Marketing Ltd and Another: ChD 9 Mar 1998

L’Oreal (UK) Limited and Another v Johnson and Johnson and Another: ChD 7 Mar 2000

The claimant appealed against an order striking out their threat action for trade mark infringement, in respect of the words ‘No Tears’ when used for children’s shampoo. Held: The court had to consider both the letter and the surrounding circumstances. A threat need not be direct, and conditionality may not be an answer. The thrust … Continue reading L’Oreal (UK) Limited and Another v Johnson and Johnson and Another: ChD 7 Mar 2000

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Inter Lotto (Uk) Ltd v Camelot Group Plc: CA 30 Jul 2003

The claimant and defendant had each operated using a the name ‘HotSpot’ for a name for its lottery. The respondent had registered the name as a trade mark. The claimant began to use the name first and claimed in passing off, and the respondent claimed infringement of its mark. Held: The law of passing off … Continue reading Inter Lotto (Uk) Ltd v Camelot Group Plc: CA 30 Jul 2003

Generale Bank Nederland Nv (Formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland Nv) v Export Credit Guarantee Department: CA 23 Jul 1997

The bank claimed that it had been defrauded, and that since an employee of the defendant had taken part in the fraud the defendant was had vicarious liability for his participation even though they knew nothing of it. Held: Where A becomes liable to B as a joint tortfeasor with C in the tort of … Continue reading Generale Bank Nederland Nv (Formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland Nv) v Export Credit Guarantee Department: CA 23 Jul 1997

L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

The court was asked as to whether the on-line marketplace site defendant was liable for trade mark infringements by those advertising goods on the web-site. Held: The ECJ had not yet clarified the law on accessory liability in trade mark infringement, and the legislation remained unclear. Many of the direct sellers were held to be … Continue reading L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

Mastercard International Incorporated v Hitachi Credit (Uk) Plc: ChD 8 Jul 2004

The claimants challenged award of a trade mark saying they were owners of many marks incorporating the word ‘Master’ associated with credit, and the applicants mark was too similar to its own. Held: Applying Davidoff, the words can also be read as extending to goods or services which are identical with or similar to those … Continue reading Mastercard International Incorporated v Hitachi Credit (Uk) Plc: ChD 8 Jul 2004

Giorgio Armani Spa v Sunrich Clothing Ltd: ChD 16 Nov 2010

The claimant appealed against refusal of the registration of its mark ‘AX’ for confusion with the defendant objector’s registered mark ‘AXE’ for similar produxts. Judges: Mann J Citations: [2010] EWHC 2939 (Ch), [2011] ETMR 13 Links: Bailii Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994, Trade Marks (International Registration) Order 2008 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Intellectual Property Updated: … Continue reading Giorgio Armani Spa v Sunrich Clothing Ltd: ChD 16 Nov 2010

Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs Com Ltd: CA 3 Mar 2004

The claimant alleged trade mark infringement by the respondents by the use of a mark in a pop-up advert. Held: The own-name defence to trade mark infringement is limited. Some confusion may be allowed if overall the competition was not unfair in all the circumstances. No confusion was intended; they wanted only to associate their … Continue reading Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs Com Ltd: CA 3 Mar 2004

Decon Laboratories Ltd v Fred Baker Scientific Ltd and Another: ChD 28 Feb 2001

The procedure for applying for the registration of a European Trade Mark did not involve the same issues as applied in England as to the use of the mark within the first five years, nor any statement of a bona fide intention to use the mark. Only exceptionally therefore could a European Trade Mark be … Continue reading Decon Laboratories Ltd v Fred Baker Scientific Ltd and Another: ChD 28 Feb 2001

Regina v C and Others: CACD 1 Nov 2016

The court considered the existence of criminal liability under the 1994 Act for those importing from outside the EU and selling within the EU items marked with trade marks but not manufactured by them (counterfeits) or licensed by the trade mark holders, but not for import to the EU. Held: The defendants objections were suggestions … Continue reading Regina v C and Others: CACD 1 Nov 2016

Hotel Cipriani Srl and Others v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd and Others: CA 24 Feb 2010

The claimants owned Community and UK trade marks in the name ‘Cipriani’. The defendants operated a restaurant in London using, under the licence of another defendant, the same name. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent further use of the name. The defendants said that they came within the ‘own name’ exception. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Hotel Cipriani Srl and Others v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd and Others: CA 24 Feb 2010

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2010

The parties had settled their disagreement, but now disputed the interpretation of the settlement. The defendant sought to be allowed to give in evidence correspondence leading up to the settlement which had been conducted on a without prejudice basis. Held: The evidence was not admissible. There was no additional class of situation where without prejudice … Continue reading Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2010

Haw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court: Admn 12 Dec 2007

The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay. Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted under s.12 should not have a right of appeal against conviction as well as against … Continue reading Haw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court: Admn 12 Dec 2007

Esure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line Insurance Plc: ChD 29 Jun 2007

Both companies sold motor insurance products at a distance and used as logos and symbols either a telephone or a computer mouse, in each case on wheels. Direct line claimed the use of the mouse by esure infringed its own trademarks, and resisted registration of esure’s trade mark. Esure now appealed a ruling against it’s … Continue reading Esure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line Insurance Plc: ChD 29 Jun 2007

L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure NV and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006

The claimant alleged that the defendants had been importing copies of their perfumes. The products were not counterfeits, but ‘smell-alikes’. The defendants’ packaging and naming was used to suggest which perfume it resembled. Held: The claimant’s expert survey evidence was defective in several ways, but even so there was no evidence of confusion under the … Continue reading L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure NV and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006

Anheuser-Busch v Budejovicky Budvar, narodni podnik: ECJ 16 Nov 2004

Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation – Articles 2(1), 16(1) and 70 of the TRIPs Agreement – Trade marks – Scope of the proprietor’s exclusive right to the trade mark – Alleged use of the sign as a trade name. Citations: C-245/02, [2004] EUECJ C-245/02, [2004] I-10989 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: European Citing: See Also – … Continue reading Anheuser-Busch v Budejovicky Budvar, narodni podnik: ECJ 16 Nov 2004

Thomson Holidays Limited v Norwegian Cruise Line Limited: CA 17 Dec 2002

Aldous LJ said: ‘Pumfrey J in the Decon case suggested that the court’s task was to arrive at a fair specification of goods having regard to the use made. I agree, but the court still has the difficult task of deciding what is fair. In my view that task should be carried out so as … Continue reading Thomson Holidays Limited v Norwegian Cruise Line Limited: CA 17 Dec 2002

Silhouette International Schmied GmbH and Co KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 16 Jul 1998

National Trade Mark rules providing for exhaustion of rights in Trade Marks for goods sold outside area of registration were contrary to the EU first directive on trade marks. A company could prevent sale of ‘grey goods’ within the internal market. Articles 5 to 7 of the directive embody a ‘complete harmonisation’ of the rules … Continue reading Silhouette International Schmied GmbH and Co KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 16 Jul 1998

Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others: HL 8 Feb 2001

The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s stores, under the name Parma Ham, but without the mark being shown. … Continue reading Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others: HL 8 Feb 2001

Pro Sieben Media AG v Carlton Television Ltd and Another: CA 7 Jan 1999

The defendant was accused of infringing copyright in a TV programme relating to the pregnancy of a woman with eight foetuses. The defendant claimed fair dealing, but that defence was rejected by the trial judge. Held: The decision was reversed. The test of use for ‘criticism or review’ is objective, and satisfied here with full … Continue reading Pro Sieben Media AG v Carlton Television Ltd and Another: CA 7 Jan 1999

Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar: CA 1984

The plaintiff sold the well-known ‘Budweiser’ beer in the US, but it was not generally available in the UK, being sold in American military bases and in a few duty-free shops. However, the beer was widely known throughout the UK because of the plaintiff’s publicity efforts as well as tourist and business traffic between Europe … Continue reading Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar: CA 1984

Re Elvis Presley Enterprises Inc: CA 19 May 1999

The name ‘Elvis Presley’ was not of itself sufficiently distinctive to justify registration as a trade mark, being neither adapted to distinguish any particular goods nor capable of distinguishing them. Citations: Gazette 19-May-1999 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Intellectual Property Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85762

British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited: ChD 25 Oct 2000

The claimant alleged that disparaging adverts by the defendant infringed its trade marks and amounted to the tort of malicious falsehood. Held: There was no dispute that the mark had been used. The Act could not be used to prevent any use of another’s trade mark in comparitive advertising. In this case the advertisement, though … Continue reading British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited: ChD 25 Oct 2000

Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares. Held: The duties of an auditor are founded in contract and the extent of the duties … Continue reading Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

British Sugar Plc v James Roberston and Sons: ChD 17 Feb 1996

The question was raised on whether, given its derivation from article 5 of the trade mark directive, non-trade mark use could be caught by sections 10(1) to (3). Held: There was no trade mark infringement by the use of a common laudatory word. The trade mark registration was cancelled. Courts should look to whether they … Continue reading British Sugar Plc v James Roberston and Sons: ChD 17 Feb 1996

Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992

Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or … Continue reading Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Mothercare UK Ltd v Penguin Books: CA 1988

The Trade Marks Act would only be concerned to restrict the use of a mark as a trade mark or in a trade mark sense, and should be construed accordingly. If descriptive words are legitimately registered [as a trade mark], there is still no reason why other people should not be free to use the … Continue reading Mothercare UK Ltd v Penguin Books: CA 1988

Parry v Cleaver: HL 5 Feb 1969

PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer. Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were not to be reduced by deducting the full net value of … Continue reading Parry v Cleaver: HL 5 Feb 1969

Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter. Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder to seek damages against advisers to … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd: QBD 15 Jul 2009

The claimant said that the defendant’s characterisation of its own products as ‘Good for You’ by reference to a description saying that it did not include the claimant’s product as a component, was a malicious falsehood. The defendant sold other products which did include Aspartame. The court was asked to determine the meanings. Held: The … Continue reading Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd: QBD 15 Jul 2009

Bunt v Tilley and others: QBD 10 Mar 2006

The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had inevitably carried the traffic from the bulletin boards to their own customers. Held: The claims were struck … Continue reading Bunt v Tilley and others: QBD 10 Mar 2006

Regina v Gough (Robert): HL 1993

The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with that brother to commit burglaries. The juror had sworn an affidavit that … Continue reading Regina v Gough (Robert): HL 1993

Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: HL 18 Feb 1993

Local Council may not Sue in Defamation Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which supported the decision to lay down the … Continue reading Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: HL 18 Feb 1993

Church of Scientology of California v Johnson-Smith: QBD 1971

The plaintiff church sued the defendant, a Member of Parliament, for remarks made by the defendant in a television programme. He pleaded fair comment and the plaintiff replied with a plea of malice, relying on statements made in Parliament. The question arose at trial whether such reliance infringed Article 9. Held: It did. The plaintiff … Continue reading Church of Scientology of California v Johnson-Smith: QBD 1971

Taylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd: ChD 1981

The fundamental principle that equity is concerned to prevent unconscionable conduct permeates all the elements of the doctrine of estoppel. In the light of the more recent cases, the principle ‘requires a very much broader approach which is directed rather at ascertaining whether, in particular individual circumstances, it would be unconscionable for a party to … Continue reading Taylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd: ChD 1981

Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the Convention the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself are generally recognised international … Continue reading Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs.Com Ltd: CA 14 Jul 2004

Walker v Wilshire still Good Law After successfully appealing, the defendant claimant argued for a substantial part of its costs, saying that the defendant had unreasonably refused ADR. To pursue this, it now sought disclosure of the details of the without prejudice negotiations between them. Held: No distinction is to be made between party-to-party negotiations … Continue reading Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs.Com Ltd: CA 14 Jul 2004

Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

The appellant complained that the respondent had imported into the European Economic Area disk drives bearing its trade marks in breach of the appellant’s rights. The respondent had argued that the appellant had abused its position by withholding information which would allow it to trade lawfully. The Court was now asked: ‘whether a person who … Continue reading Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2): HL 12 Oct 2000

The plaintiffs alleged the involvement of the defendant in a conspiracy to defraud. He had been domiciled in England, but had moved to Germany. He denied that the UK court had jurisdiction. The court of appeal said that jurisdiction was determined at the issue of the writ. The defendant appealed. Held: Where one defendant was … Continue reading Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2): HL 12 Oct 2000

Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act could become criminal. The prosecutor appealed the decision of … Continue reading Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: HL 28 Jul 2005

Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by other companies should proceed through the Commissioners who could implement European law directly. The taxpayers … Continue reading Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: HL 28 Jul 2005

Bhayani and Another v Taylor Bracewell Llp: IPEC 22 Dec 2016

Distinction between reputation and goodwill The claimant had practised independently as an employment solicitor. For a period, she was a partner with the defendant firm practising under the name ‘Bhayani Bracewell’. Having departed the firm, she now objected to the continued use of her name, alleging passing off, and requesting revocation of the associated trade … Continue reading Bhayani and Another v Taylor Bracewell Llp: IPEC 22 Dec 2016

Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Sympathetic construction of national legislation LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC Directive designed to protect companies and third parties from the adverse effects of the doctrine of nullity. … Continue reading Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Johnson v Unisys Ltd: HL 23 Mar 2001

The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system. Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair dismissal is a complete system, and was intended to replace any common law action for damages arising … Continue reading Johnson v Unisys Ltd: HL 23 Mar 2001