Search results

Accessory liability: when will directors be held liable for IP infringements committed by their companies – and what is counted as "profits"?

Published on 20 Jun 2024. By Emma Dunnill, Senior Associate and Rory Graham, Associate

The Supreme Court in Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Ahmed & Anor [2024] UKSC 17, has allowed an appeal by two company directors who were found liable as accessories to trade mark infringement by the company in which they were directors. The decision provides helpful clarification on the required elements for accessory liability in the context of IP right infringement claims and confirms the sums to be included in an account of profits if liability is established (spoiler alert: a director's salary is not considered to be "profit").

Online platforms should Swatch out: Samsung found liable for infringing third-party content available on the Samsung Galaxy App store

Published on 22 Jan 2024. By Sarah Mountain, Partner and Emma Dunnill, Senior Associate and Zoe Harvey, Associate

The Court of Appeal in Montres Breguet SA v Samsung Electronics [2023] EWCA Civ 1478 has dismissed Samsung's appeal and upheld a first instance decision which found it liable for trade mark infringement in relation to third-party watch faces available on the Samsung Galaxy App store. This judgment provides guidance on what constitutes "use" of a sign by an online app store and the applicability of the e-Commerce Directive hosting defence.

The November 2023 AI safety summit and the UK's direction of travel

Published on 29 Aug 2023. By Helen Armstrong, Partner and Charles Buckworth, Partner and Joshy Thomas, Knowledge Lawyer

The government has confirmed that the UK AI safety summit will be held at Bletchley Park on 1 and 2 November 2023.

Telecoms supply agreement excludes "loss of profit" claim under "anticipated profits" liability exclusion (EE v Virgin Mobile)

Published on 25 Aug 2023. By Helen Armstrong, Partner and Ben Harris, Associate and Joshy Thomas, Knowledge Lawyer

In line with a number of recent cases, in EE Limited v Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited [2023] EWHC 1989 (TCC) the courts have shown that parties generally cannot avoid clear wording contained in exclusion clauses in order to recover losses that have been expressly excluded (in this case, loss of profits).

Rolls-Royce entitled to hit the brakes in dispute over termination of a software services agreement (Topalsson v Rolls-Royce)

Published on 14 Aug 2023. By Helen Armstrong, Partner and Ben Harris, Associate and Joshy Thomas, Knowledge Lawyer

In Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited [2023] EWHC 1765 (TCC), the High Court has provided useful guidance on how to determine whether a software implementation timeline agreed by the parties is binding, when implementation is considered complete and in what circumstances failing to complete implementation by the contractual deadlines entitles the customer to terminate the contract.

A narrow escape – software services provider entitled to rely on single aggregate liability cap (Drax v Wipro)

Published on 25 Jul 2023. By Helen Armstrong, Partner and Ben Harris, Associate and Joshy Thomas, Knowledge Lawyer

When it comes to bespoke software development projects, a lot can go wrong. There's risk for the customer such as project delays, software defects, functionality issues and a lack of meeting of minds in terms of project requirements.

The Sky's the limit for trade mark applications. Or is it?

Published on 12 Jul 2023. By Sarah Mountain, Partner and Ellie Chakarto, Senior Associate and Noonie Holmes, Associate