Tag: Intellectual Property

Union Des Associations Europeennes De Football v British Telecommunications Plc and Others: ChD 21 Dec 2017

Challenge by owners of football copyrights to the defendant internet service prvidersfor failing to block streaming services said to infringe those rights.

Judges:

Arnold J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3414 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.602621

W3 Ltd v Easygroup Ltd and Another: ChD 12 Jan 2018

Trade Mark dispute as towhether the Claimant (‘W3’) has infringed any valid EU trade mark of the Defendant (‘easyGroup’) by use of the sign ‘EasyRoommate’ and variants thereof in relation to an online service for sharing accommodation in the UK and eight other EU Member States.

Judges:

Arnold J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 7 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.602627

Amway Corporation v Eurway International Ltd: ChD 1974

The subject matter of a claim in confidence must be ‘information’, and that information must be clear and identifiable as being confidential.
Brightman J said: ‘I asked the plaintiffs’ counsel if he could point in his literature to some particular piece of information which he said was confidential and which he claimed the defendants were wrongly using. He told me that he pointed to nothing in issue here but to the entirety of the plaintiffs’ documentary material which is in evidence.
It seems to me that a claim for abuse of confidential information cannot really be dealt with in that way. If I made an order restraining the defendants from using for their own purposes any of the documentary material contained in the plaintiffs’ business literature, but did not identify the particular information that the defendants are not to impart, they would be placed in a most embarrassing situation. I do not know how they could decide what business methods, literature and paperwork to avoid using in order to keep clear of contempt of court, and I think that that is an insuperable difficulty in the plaintiffs’ claim under this head.’

Judges:

Brightman J

Citations:

[1974] RPC 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Starbucks (HK) Ltd and Another v British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc and Others SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked whether, as the appellants contended, a claimant who is seeking to maintain an action in passing off need only establish a reputation among a significant section of the public within the jurisdiction, or whether, as the courts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.566009

Incyte Corporation v Szellemi Tulajdon Nemzeti Hivatala: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Approximation of Laws Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property Agriculture and Fisheries – Plant Health Legislation) – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual and industrial property – Patents – Medicinal products for human use – Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 – Article 18 – Plant-protection products – Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 – Article 17(2) – Supplementary protection certificate – Duration – Fixing the date of expiry – Consequences of a judgment of the Court – Possibility or requirement to rectify the date of expiry

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:995, C-492/16, [2017] EUECJ C-492/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602097

Sony Computer Entertainment Europe v EUIPO – Vieta Audio (Vita): ECFI 12 Dec 2017

EU Trade Mark – Revocation Proceedings : Judgment – EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark Vita – Genuine use of the mark – Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Use in connection with the goods in question – Obligation to state reasons

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:886, [2017] EUECJ T-35/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602112

Schweppes v Red Paralela SL: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Approximation of Laws Approximation of Laws Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property – Trade Marks – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Trade marks – Directive 2008/95/EC – Article 7(1) – Exhaustion of the rights conferred by a trade mark – Parallel trade marks – Assignment of trade marks in respect of part of the European Economic Area (EEA) – Commercial strategy deliberately promoting the image of a single global trade mark following that assignment – Independent proprietors nonetheless maintaining close commercial and economic relations

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:990, [2017] EUECJ C-291/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602110

Bet365 Group v EUIPO – Hansen (Bet365) (Eu Trade Mark – Invalidity Proceedings : Judgment): ECFI 14 Dec 2017

ECJ EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark BET 365 – Absolute ground for refusal – Distinctive character acquired through use – Proof – Use of the mark for a number of purposes – Article 7(3) and Article 52(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) and Article 59(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Citations:

T-304/16, [2017] EUECJ T-304/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602068

Acacia Srl v Pneusgarda Srl, in insolvency, Audi AG: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

General and Final Provisions Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property Approximation of Laws – References for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Community designs – Article 110(1) – No protection -‘Repair’ clause – Concept of ‘component part of a complex product’ – Repair of the complex product so as to restore its original appearance – Measures to be adopted by the user for the purposes of relying on the ‘repair’ clause – Replica car wheel rim identical to the original wheel rim design

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:992, [2017] EUECJ C-397/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602063

Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (T/A Allen and Hanburys) and Another v Sandoz Ltd and Others: ChD 15 Dec 2017

Application by the claimants for permission to adduce survey evidence in passing off proceedings arising out of the colour and get-up of ‘Seretide’ combination inhalers.

Judges:

Birss J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3196 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Glaxo Wellcome Uk Ltd (T/A Allen and Hanburys) and Another v Sandoz Ltd and Others ChD 28-Jun-2017
Expert evidence in trade mark infringement claim. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601833

Tulliallan Burlington v Euipo – Burlington Fashion (Burlington The Original): ECFI 6 Dec 2017

ECJ Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property : Trade Marks : Judgment – EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL – Earlier national word marks BURLINGTON and BURLINGTON ARCADE – Earlier EU and national figurative marks BURLINGTON ARCADE – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance – Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade marks – Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:872, [2017] EUECJ T-121/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601087

Paymaster (Jamaica) Ltd and Another v Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Ltd: PC 11 Dec 2017

(Court of Appeal of Jamaica) The parties disputed the ownership of copyight in certain computer software, and also an allegation of the misuse of confidential information.

Judges:

Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs

Citations:

[2017] UKPC 40

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Robin Ray v Classic FM Plc PatC 18-Mar-1998
Contractor and Client Copyrights
The plaintiff had contributed a design for a system of classifying and selecting tracks to be played on a radio station. He did so under a consultancy contract.
Held: A Joint authorship claim required that the contributor had made some direct . .
Cited – Watt (or Thomas) v Thomas HL 1947
When Scots Appellate Court may set decision aside
The House considered when it was appropriate for an appellate court in Scotland to set aside the judgment at first instance.
Lord Thankerton said: ‘(1) Where a question of fact has been tried by a judge without a jury, and there is no question . .
Cited – Seager v Copydex Ltd CA 1967
Mr Seager had invented a patented carpet grip which he manufactured and marketed under the trade mark Klent. There were protracted negotiations between Mr Seager and Copydex over a proposal for Copydex to market the Klent. One of the issues in the . .
Cited – Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd ChD 1968
Requirememts to prove breach of confidence
A claim was made for breach of confidence in respect of technical information whose value was commercial.
Held: Megarry J set out three elements which will normally be required if, apart from contract, a case of breach of confidence is to . .
Cited – Trollope and Colls Limited v North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board HL 1973
The court was requested to imply a term into a building contract.
Held: The term could not be implied, since at least four alternatives might also be implied.
Lord Pearson said: ‘[T]he court does not make a contract for the parties. The . .
Cited – Philips Electronique v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd CA 1995
There is a presumption against adding terms to a contract. The presumption is stronger where the contract is in writing and represents an apparently complete bargain between the parties. Sir Thomas Bingham MR set out Lord Simon’s formulation, and . .
Cited – Unilever Plc v The Procter and Gamble Company PatC 24-Feb-1999
Representatives of the Defendant company were said to have asserted, during an expressly ‘without prejudice’ meeting, that the plaintiff’s marketing of its product infringed the Defendant’s patent and threatened to bring an action for infringement. . .
Cited – Conticorp Sa and others v The Central Bank of Ecuador and others PC 20-Jun-2007
(The Bahamas ) . .
Cited – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited and Another SC 2-Jul-2014
It was said that land, a hotal and gold courses, had been sold at an undervalue and that the transaction was void as against the seller’s liquidator.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The critical issue was whether ‘the alienation was made for . .
Cited – Beacon Insurance Company Ltd v Maharaj Bookstore Ltd PC 9-Jul-2014
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board was asked as to an insurance claim arising out of a fire and the insurance company’s rejection of that claim on the ground that part of it was fraudulent or had involved fraudulent devices. The principal issue was . .
Cited – Central Bank of Ecuador and Others v Conticorp Sa and Others PC 23-Mar-2015
From the Court of Appeal of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas. The Board was asked as to the probity of three transactions entered into by the appellant. Held; The nominee director at the centre of the allegations had, in breach of his duty to the . .
Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd and Another SC 2-Dec-2015
The Court considered whether, on exercising a break clause in a lease, the tenant was entitled to recover rent paid in advance.
Held: The appeal failed. The Court of Appeal had imposed what was established law. The test for whether a clause . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601092

Xiaomi v EUIPO – Apple (MI Pad): ECFI 5 Dec 2017

Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property : Trade Marks : Judgment – EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark MI PAD – Earlier EU word mark IPAD – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Similarity of the goods and services

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:868, [2017] EUECJ T-893/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601088

Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO – Burlington Fashion (Burlington) T-123/16: ECFI 6 Dec 2017

EJ Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property : Trade Marks : Judgment – EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Word mark BURLINGTON – Earlier national word marks BURLINGTON and BURLINGTON ARCADE – Earlier EU and national figurative marks BURLINGTON ARCADE – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance – Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade marks – Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:870, [2017] EUECJ T-123/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601086

Sheepworld v EUIPO (Alles Wird Gut): ECFI 7 Dec 2017

(Judgment) Trademark of the European Union – European Union word mark application Alles wird gut – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7 (1) (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [renumbered as Article 7 (1) (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:878, [2017] EUECJ T-622/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601080

Claranet Europe v EUIPO – Claro (Claranet) (Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property : Trade Marks): ECFI 14 Nov 2017

Judgment – EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark claranet – Earlier Benelux word mark CLARO – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Citations:

T-129/16, [2017] EUECJ T-129/16, ECLI:EU:T:2017:800

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.599670

Steiniger v EUIPO- Ista Deutschland (Ist): ECFI 8 Nov 2017

(Judgment) Trade mark of the European Union – Opposition proceedings – Application for a mark of the figurative European Union IST – Trademark of the former figurative European Union ISTA – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Relevant public – Similarity of the goods and of services – Similarity of signs – Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Citations:

T-80/17, [2017] EUECJ T-80/17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598933

Frame v EUIPO – Bianca-Moden (Biancaluna): ECFI 7 Nov 2017

EU Trade Mark – Opposition Proceedings : Judgment – EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark BIANCALUNA – Earlier national figurative mark bianca – Procedural economy – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Identity of the goods – Similarity of the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:782, [2017] EUECJ T-627/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598924

Oakley, Inc v EUIPO: ECFI 8 Nov 2017

(Judgment) Trade mark of the European Union – Opposition proceedings – Application for registration of the figurative European Union mark representing a discontinuous ellipse-shaped silhouette – European earlier figurative union mark representing an ellipse – Reasons relating to of refusal – Article 8 (1) (b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8 (1) (b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 ]

Citations:

T-754/16, [2017] EUECJ T-754/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598931

Galletas Gullon v Euipo – O2 Holdings (Forme D’Un Paquet De Biscuits): ECFI 23 Oct 2017

Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Property – Trade Marks Intellectual, Industrial and Commercial Propert – EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – Three-dimensional EU trade mark – Shape of a packet of biscuits – Declaration of revocation – Extent of use – No alteration of distinctive character

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:745, [2017] EUECJ T-404/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598858

Scomadi Ltd and Another v RA Engineering Co Ltd and Others (Judgment): IPEC 27 Oct 2017

Claims and counterclaims covering breach of contract, trade mark infringement, passing off, Registered Community Design (‘RCD’) infringement, UK unregistered design right infringement, negligent misrepresentation, negligent misstatement, infringement of copyright, and rescission .

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2658 (IPEC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Main Judgment – Scomadi Ltd and Another v RA Engineering Co Ltd and Others (Orders) IPEC 27-Oct-2017
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.598318