Search results
1809 results ordered by
Hold your horses: Raceday data dispute likely to head to Supreme Court
In a dispute, between suppliers of live betting and raceday data from racecourses, the Court of Appeal was asked to consider whether a duty of confidence could be applied to live sports data between its creation and broadcast when that information was available in real time. We look at the Court's decision, and the reasons for it, in more detail below.
Read moreBrexit – a guide to protecting your rights from 1 January 2021
Like many other areas of law, intellectual property (IP) will undergo a raft of changes overnight, when the Brexit transition period expires on December 31 2020.
Read moreNeat infringement claim leaves whiskey competitor’s trade mark on the rocks
The producers of Eagle Rare bourbon whiskey have succeeded in their trade mark infringement claim against competitor, American Eagle. The case highlights the impact of market-specific context in determining whether consumers are likely to be confused by similar trade marks. Whilst the case has general relevance, it will be of specific interest to alcohol and luxury goods brands.
Read moreToo many cooks… 'Fit Kitchen' trade mark infringed
On 29 July, Fit Kitchen Limited (FKL) won its case for trade mark infringement and passing off against Scratch Meals Limited (SML). Both FKL and SML provide healthy pre-prepared meals: FKL via an online subscription site, which allows users to customise meal choices, based on their individual macros and dietary preferences and SML, through the manufacture and sale of products to supermarkets.
Read moreBritish Gymnastics lands well in trade mark infringement proceedings
The national governing body (NGB) for Gymnastics in Britain has succeeded in trade mark infringement and passing off proceedings against an organisation using the sign “UK Gymnastics”, in a Judgment which is likely to assist several Sport England and UK Sport-funded NGBs. In particular, it shows how to deal with organisations using signs which suggest they are an NGB (when they are not).
Read moreSega’s early win against Man Utd in Football Manager trade mark case
As first published by leading sports law resource LawInSport, Jeremy Drew and Samuel Coppard discuss Man United’s trade mark infringement proceedings against Sega and Sports Interactive in relation to Football Manager.
Read moreLuxury and online marketplaces - the next chapter (Coty v Amazon)
On 2 April 2020, the CJEU ruled that storing infringing goods on behalf of a third-party seller, without knowing that those goods infringe trade mark rights does not constitute infringement, provided that the storing party does not pursue the aim of offering the goods for sale or putting them on the market.
Read moreLandmark case sees trade mark specifications cut down on grounds of bad faith.
Today, the High Court handed down judgment in Sky v SkyKick. The judgment follows the CJEU's 29 January 2020 decision, which answered various questions that the High Court had referred to it, back in June 2018.
Read moreCOVID-19 prompts changes to working arrangements for the Court of Justice of the European Union
Prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the CJEU announced, on 19 March 2020, that it will be temporarily changing its working arrangements.
Read moreEUIPO issues clarification on COVID-19 extension of time for trade mark and design proceedings
The EUIPO has issued a clarification in respect of Decision No EX-20-3 noting that the extension of deadlines in trade mark and design EUIPO proceedings to 1 May 2020 applies automatically.
Read moreSo Long Blues
Following our previous IP hub update, Glaxo has suffered fresh survey woes.
Read moreHigh Court permits enforcement of foreign judgment in crypto recovery case
Tai Mo Shan Ltd v. Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 1514 (Comm)
Read moreCourt of Appeal finds that Bitcoin's developers may owe fiduciary duties to bitcoin owners
In a highly anticipated judgment, the Court of Appeal has handed down its decision in Tulip Trading Limited v van der Laan and others [2023] EWCA Civ 83, allowing the claimant's appeal. The court found that the developers looking after Bitcoin arguably owed fiduciary duties in tort to an owner of bitcoin, and whether such a duty did arise in the specific proceedings would depend on the facts established at trial.
Read moreLitigation risk arising from recent LDI related disruption in the UK gilt market
In this bulletin, we examine the role of Liability Driven Investment (LDI) in the widely publicised disruption experienced in the UK gilts market in recent weeks and consider the disputes which might result.
Read moreCompeting subordinated debts – the lessons learnt from Lehmans' insolvency
Some 13 years ago, Lehman Brothers' sudden and unexpected insolvency sent ripples across the banking and financial services market, some of which are still felt today. The Court of Appeal's decision in the consolidated cases of Lehman Brothers Holdings Scottish LP 3 v Lehman Brothers Holdings plc (in administration) and others [2021] EWCA Civ 1523 was the latest in a long line of cases seeking to unwind the issues arising from Lehman Brothers' unexpected collapse.
Read moreHigh Court decides that reviving proceedings automatically stayed under CPR 15.11 requires relief from sanctions
In a recent judgment, the English Commercial Court in Bank of America Europe DAC v CITTA Metropolitana Di Milano has provided guidance on the "automatic stay" provisions of CPR 15.11 and the circumstances in which parties can revive dormant proceedings subject to such an automatic stay.
Read moreAPP fraud: Commercial Court considers approach to unjust enrichment and knowing receipt claims
The recent Commercial Court decision of Tecnimont Arabia Limited v National Westminster Bank PLC(1) considered the court's approach to a claim for unjust enrichment against a recipient bank in an authorised push payment (APP) fraud context. In particular, the Court examined whether the enrichment can be said to be at the 'expense' of the claimant, what factors amount to enrichment being 'unjust' and when the defence of 'change of position' is available. In relation to knowing receipt, the court considered the question of when property is 'trust property' for the purposes of the cause of action.
Read moreAre you a "person discharging managerial responsibility"? High Court clarifies meaning of PDMRs under FSMA
In a recent interim decision in Allianz Global Investors GmbH and Ors v G4S Ltd (formerly G4S plc) [2022] EWHC 1081 (Ch), Mr Justice Miles clarified the scope of the expression "persons discharging managerial responsibility" ("PDMRs") for the purpose of establishing liability under s.90A and Schedule 10A of Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 ("FSMA").
Read morePrivy Council decides that banks owe no Quincecare duty to a beneficial owner of monies in an account
A bank does not owe the beneficial owner of account monies any duty of care in negligence, including any Quincecare duty: this was the conclusion of the Privy Council in the Isle of Man case Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd v JP SPC4 and another. The appeal concerned a fraud where the account holder had defrauded the beneficial owner of the monies, an investment fund, by paying funds out of the relevant bank accounts in contravention of a legitimate investment scheme.
Read moreCourt of Appeal strikes out defences that funds' losses resulting from FX manipulation have been passed on to investors following redemption
In Allianz Global Investors GmbH & Ors v Barclays Bank PLC & Ors(1), the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the claimant funds (the Funds) and struck out defences by the Defendant banks (the Banks) that losses incurred by the Funds had been avoided or passed on upon redemption by their investors.
Read moreCourt of Appeal holds that Quincecare duty can arise in principle where customer gives instructions in authorised push payment fraud
The Court of Appeal has clarified in Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 318 that the Quincecare duty, which requires a bank to refrain from acting on a payment instruction and to make inquiries when it is on notice of a serious possibility of fraud, can arise for a bank even where it is the customer themselves giving instructions to pay money out of their account to a fraudster.
Read moreCourt of Appeal draws distinction between claims for recovery of tax and restitution for tax paid out fraudulently
In Skatteforvaltningen v Solo Capital Partners,(1) the Court of Appeal investigated in detail the operation of rule 3(1) of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws (edition 15) (Dicey rule 3), which provides that English courts do not have jurisdiction over actions for "the enforcement, either directly or indirectly, of a penal, revenue, or other public law of a foreign State". The Court decided that the Danish tax authority's claim did not fall within Dicey rule 3 as it concerned the restitution of monies misappropriated by fraud rather than enforcement of tax.
Read moreWhere's the damage? High Court dismisses jurisdiction challenge in US$495 million claim
The High Court has dismissed UBS' challenge to jurisdiction in a ca. US$495 million claim – and in doing so set out useful guidance in terms of how the Court will determine "where the damage has occurred" in cases of economic loss. The judge looked for the most "natural analysis" in determining the manifestation of the loss, and broadly agreed that "the usual answer [in bad investment cases] will be that the loss occurs in, and at the place of, the bank account which was depleted."
Read moreESG claims in the banking and financial markets Sector: will "greenwashing" claims soon be common in the UK?
Environmental, Social and Governance "ESG" funds are an attractive avenue for investors seeking responsible investment choices.
Read moreNo knowing receipt claim where equitable interest is destroyed: Byers v Saudi National Bank
The Court of Appeal has held that a claim in knowing receipt will fail if, at the moment of receipt, the beneficiary’s equitable proprietary interest is destroyed or overridden so that the recipient holds the property as beneficial owner.
Read moreHow aware were you? High Court refuses to strike out fraudulent misrepresentation claim in VW 'Dieselgate' emissions
In Crossley and others v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft and others(1) the High Court refused to strike out or summarily dismiss the fraudulent misrepresentation claim brought by more than 86,000 vehicle owners against Volkswagen ("VW").
Read moreHigh Court dismisses application for extension of limitation period on basis of fraud at summary judgment stage
In Libyan Investment Authority v Credit Suisse International & Ors ([2021] EWHC 2684 (Comm), the Commercial Court granted summary judgment dismissing the Libyan Investment Authority's (LIA's) claims against Credit Suisse International (Credit Suisse) and others on the grounds that they were time-barred.
Read moreLimitation Act 1980 s.32(1): whether a claimant could have discovered fraud with "reasonable diligence" extends to events prior to accrual of the cause of action
The High Court found that, when considering the postponement of the limitation period for the purposes of Section 32(1) of the Limitation Act 1980, the question of whether the claimant could have discovered the fraud with "reasonable diligence" extends to the period before the claimant suffered a loss.
Read moreEnglish Commercial Court upholds the validity of swap contracts entered into by an Italian local authority
The Commercial Court has found that there was no limitation on the capacity of the Italian local authority Busto di Arsizio to enter into a valid swap contracts with Deutsche Bank.
Read moreEBA encourages banks to pool their resources for cloud audits
The EBA has set out that banks are no longer required to provide their auditors (or themselves) with an independent right to audit their cloud service providers.
Read moreAI in auditing: Embracing a new age for the profession
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rather new concept for many (ignoring those versed in 80’s Sci-Fi movies); it’s something many don’t know much about and certainly don’t use in our day-to-day lives (or at least appreciate we are using). However, that’s not the case for everyone. Auditors have long been reaping the benefits of AI, but are auditors just scratching the surface of what AI can offer and what impact will an increased use have on their insurance requirements and claims they face?
Read moreNavigating the impact of AI on work: challenges, opportunities, and the human touch
The fear of job losses because of technology and automation, including artificial intelligence, has been with us since the 1960s. For some time, academics have predicted the decline of routine, rules-based and process-driven roles.
Read moreVirtual billboards: the future of immersive advertising?
With the deployment of immersive technologies poised to become the norm, the implementation of infrastructure for "virtual billboards", and the "property digital rights" which they demand, is demonstrating a lucrative gap in the market and huge growth potential.
Read moreEU AI ACT-ion stations
The EU is forging ahead with its vision for AI. With wrapping up talks on the EU AI Act between the EU governments, the Commission and the parliamentary negotiators imminent, we bring you up to date on the EU's risk based approach, the scope of the Act, a timeline, key points that will form the basis of the discussions and next steps.
Read moreWhat To Know About AI Fraudsters Before Facing Disputes
Fraudsters are quick to weaponise new technological developments and artificial intelligence is proving no exception, with AI-assisted scams increasingly being reported in the news, including most recently one using a likeness of a BBC broadcaster.
Read moreUnderstanding and managing the risks in artificial intelligence (AI) technology projects
How do you go about managing the risks and challenges that might arise during the deployment of AI technology?
Read moreAI technology projects – the regulatory landscape
Parties engaged in AI technology projects should be mindful of the regulatory landscape, and the changes taking place within it. A failure to do so could result in an AI solution that is not compliant from a regulatory perspective, the use of which potentially creates risk for the technology provider and user.
Read moreThe High Court continues interim anti-harassment injunction
At a return date hearing on 12 July 2024, Aidan Eardley KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) continued until trial or further order an anti-harassment injunction granted to prevent the Defendant from, amongst other things, approaching or contacting the Claimant.
Read moreThe Supreme Court clarifies the law on the recovery of damages for non-pecuniary damage arising out of a maliciously false statement
The Claimant was an employee of the second defendant, LCA, a recruitment agency owned and operated by the first defendant. After leaving LCA, the Claimant was employed by another recruitment agency and began targeting LCA's clients. LCA's owner told two third parties, one of whom was the Claimant’s new line manager and the other a client of LCA, that by doing this the Claimant was in breach of her contract of employment with LCA. In fact, there was no term of that contract (as the owner of LCA knew) which prohibited the claimant from soliciting business from LCA’s clients.
Read moreOfcom's 'Roadmap to Regulation' underway with its consultation on illegal harms duties under the Online Safety Act
In November, Ofcom, as new online safety regulator, published the first of four major consultations under the Online Safety Act ("OSA"), which sets out its proposals for how "user-to-user" ("U2U") services (essentially any online website or app that allows users to interact with each other) and online search services (i.e. Google, Bing and similar) should approach their illegal content duties under the new legislation. The consultation provides guidance in a number of areas including governance, content moderation, reporting and complaints mechanisms, terms of service, supporting child users, and user empowerment.
Read moreThe Online Safety Bill is set to become law
The Online Safety Bill will shortly become law in the UK as soon as it receives Royal Assent. The legislation will introduce a new regulatory regime for online platforms and search engines which target the UK, imposing wide-ranging obligations on in-scope services with serious consequences for non-compliance.
Read moreThe Online Safety Bill and the risk of unintended consequences
The Online Safety Bill was reintroduced to Parliament late last year, with new amendments receiving scrutiny in the House of Commons in December, before the bill entered the House of Lords in January. The bill continues to evolve, most notably with the government removing the requirement for user-to-user platforms and search engines to prevent adult users from encountering "legal but harmful" content, instead requiring online platforms to provide users with enhanced content controls (i.e., choice as to what content is seen), and imposing further obligations around transparency and enforcement of online platforms' terms and conditions. "Legal but harmful" obligations remain in place for under 18s. The government has recently agreed to introduce criminal sanctions for senior managers who fail to take proportionate measures to protect children from potentially harmful content.
Read moreThe Model Anti-SLAPP Law: an overview
Following the Government's response to the SLAPP consultation in the summer, the UK Anti-SLAPP coalition (a working group that includes English PEN, the Foreign Policy Centre and Index on Censorship, "the Coalition") has this week published a model Anti-SLAPP law, which has been endorsed by a collection of free speech and anti-corruption organisations, journalists, editors and lawyers.
Read moreInterim injunctions and competing public interests (Attorney General v BBC)
In Her Majesty's Attorney General for England and Wales v British Broadcasting Corporation [2022] EWHC 826 (QB), an interim injunction has been granted in favour of the Attorney General (AG) to restrain the BBC from broadcasting the identity and image of an alleged covert human intelligence source for MI5 (known only as ‘X’) who is accused of being abusive to two former partners and using his position with MI5 to terrorise and control one of the women. The injunction was granted on the basis that, while it "represented a very significant interference with the right of the BBC to freedom of expression and the correlative right of the public to receive the information the BBC wishes to publish" [23], such a measure was necessary in order to prevent a real and immediate risk to X’s life or safety, as well as the potential wider impact of publication on national security.
Read moreFinal UK listing rules: modified transfer process for issuers in transition category
On 11 July 2024, the FCA published the final UK Listing Rules (UKLR) which came into effect on 29 July 2024 (Implementation Date). The UKLR are broadly in line with the FCA's previous proposals.
Read moreUK government updates NSIA market guidance and statement on call-in powers
Recent developments such as the removal of Huawei from the UK's 5G networks and President Biden's 2023 executive order on outbound investment in sensitive technologies have brought into focus potential national security risks arising from global trade and investment.
Read moreUK listing regime reforms: impact on standard listed issuers
Following the FCA's May 2023 consultation on major reforms to streamline and enhance the UK listing regime and its December 2023 publication of detailed proposals, the FCA has now published a consolidated draft UK Listing Rules instrument (UKLR) to replace the current Listing Rules, together with proposed changes to its guidance.
Read moreReversal of recent changes to the Financial Promotions Order
A number of the provisions of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 came into force on 4 March 2024. This Act is intended to give UK Companies House greater powers to prevent UK companies from being used for economic crimes.
Read moreProvisions of Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 now in force
A number of the provisions of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 came into force on 4 March 2024. This Act is intended to give UK Companies House greater powers to prevent UK companies from being used for economic crimes.
Read moreSpring Budget 2024 – Main tax announcements
This blog discusses some of the key tax changes announced in last week's Spring Budget.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here