Search results
1622 results ordered by
Neat 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 moreCopyright: Online platform operators’ liability for users illegally uploading copyright material
C-682/18 Frank Peterson v Google LLC and others and C 683/18 Elsevier Inc. v Cyando AG EU:C:2020:586 – A-G opinion
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 moreLegal claims against banks expected following collapse in Sterling
Legal disputes between banks and their business customers are expected following the collapse in the value of sterling against the U.S. Dollar and the volatility of other currencies, says international law firm RPC.
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 moreConstruction and Engineering Law 2024
We are delighted to have contributed once again to ICLG's Construction and Engineering Law guide for 2024. The comprehensive guide delves into the multifaceted world of construction and engineering law, providing an essential reference for understanding and comparing the handling of common legal challenges across various jurisdictions.
Read morePart 4 – AI Regulation in Asia
This is Part 4 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read moreOfcom and ICO to collaborate on Online Safety and Data Protection
How are the data protection and broadcasting regulators collaborating to regulate online services from a safety and privacy perspective, and what does this mean for businesses and services regulated by both bodies?
Read moreNew development: DPDI Bill fails to become law
The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (DPDIB), the proposal for post-Brexit data protection laws in the UK, did not pass through Parliament before its dissolution on 24 May 2024 ahead of the general election on 4 July 2024. This means that the DPDIB has failed to become law and any proposals for data reform in the UK will largely need to start afresh in the new Parliament.
Read moreICO forces Serco Leisure to stop using facial recognition technology for employees
In what circumstances can facial recognition technology (FRT) be acceptable to monitor employees in the workplace?
Read moreThe ICO’s strategic approach to regulating AI
How can the ICO’s recently published AI strategy paper help businesses navigate the evolving AI regulatory landscape, particularly in respect of data protection principles?
Read moreICO publishes guidance on content moderation
What steps should businesses operating content moderation systems in the UK be taking to comply with new guidance published by the UK’s Information Commissioner (ICO)?
Read more“Consent or pay” models under scrutiny in UK and EU
Are “consent or pay” business models compliant with data protection law?
Read moreAI in Construction
There is a lot of discussion around Artificial Intelligence ("AI") and its application to industry. We have considered what AI is, the benefits and risks, how it fits into the construction industry, the effect on insurers and what the future holds.
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 moreThe Role of AI in Disputes
While lawyers have had various forms of AI available to them for years, it is generative AI and the development of large language models (LLMs) which is likely to represent a fundamental shift for dispute resolution. This technology now offers language capabilities that have never been seen before, and is likely to transform the way lawyers conduct proceedings.
Read moreAI-as-a-Service – Key Issues
Artificial Intelligence-as-a-Service (AIaaS), in the same vein as Software-as-a-Service and Infrastructure-as-a-Service, refers to cloud-based tools that allow businesses to gain access to an AI model hosted by a third party provider.
Read moreProcuring AI – Commercial Considerations Checklist
Many companies will no doubt be considering using AI within their business to take advantage of the massive opportunities for increased productivity and cost efficiencies promised.
Read moreGenerative AI – Addressing Copyright
When it comes to the interaction of AI and IP rights, bar a flurry of activity surrounding the inevitable outcome by all of the courts including the Supreme Court in the Thaler, Dabus case, most attention has been focussed on copyright. There are three main potentially thorny issues and all have been extensively covered by the mainstream media.
Read moreAI and Privacy – 10 Questions to Ask
We set out in this section 10 key questions to ask yourself at the outset when developing or deploying AI solutions in your business.
Read moreThe Ethics of AI - The Digital Dilemma
This is Part 6 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 6 – Practical Considerations
This is Part 6 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 5 – AI Regulation Globally
This is Part 5 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 3 - AI regulation in the US
Back in October 2022, the White House published federal guidance – a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights identifying five principles aiming to guide the design, use, and deployment of automated systems. It was designed to operate as a roadmap to protect the public from AI harms and was followed in October 2023 by the US President's Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence...
Read morePart 2 - AI regulation in the EU
The EU AI Act, the main elements of which are covered in our previous article, was provisionally agreed in December 2023. Shortly after it was agreed, the Commission released some Q&As to flesh out the key provisions and timelines for application. It is anticipated that the latest text of the Artificial Intelligence Act will be formally adopted by both Parliament and Council in April, triggering a graduated two year period for compliance (with obligations for high-risk systems defined in Annex II applicable in 3 years).
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here