News
-
High Court Trade Mark Decision Leaves Tobacco Companies Fuming
10 June 2016Read more >British American Tobacco & others v Department of Health [2016] EWHC 1169 This case concerns the introduction of plain packaging legislation for tobacco products in the United Kingdom. The decision was handed down on 19 May ahead of the introduction of the Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015 (“the Regulations”) on 20 May, the UK’s […]
-
Bulgaria becomes the tenth country to ratify the UPC Agreement
9 June 2016Read more >On 3 June 2016, Bulgaria became the tenth country to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement by depositing its instrument of ratification. This now leaves the UK, Germany and one other country to ratify before the Agreement takes effect. Please see our updated UP and UPC pages for the latest information. James Mitchell Electronics, […]
-
The Strength of a Settlement
3 June 2016Read more >Stretchline Intellectual Properties Ltd v H&M Hennes & Mauritz UK Ltd [2016] EWHC 162 (Pat), 21 January 2016 Following a long running dispute involving Stretchline’s patent for a tubular fabric composition, this recent High Court decision explores remedies that are available for alleged infringement following a settlement. This decision provides useful guidance on the finality […]
-
A “RAW” Deal for H&M in Trade Mark Infringement Decision?
1 June 2016Read more >A “RAW” Deal for H&M in Trade Mark Infringement Decision? Hague Court of Appeal March 2016 Case Comment The Hague Court of Appeal has found H&M liable for infringement of G-Star Raw’s trade marks in the word RAW. In 2011, G-Star Raw (“G-Star”) brought trade mark infringement proceedings against H&M, the Swedish fashion company, after […]
-
Inventions made by university employees – entitled or not?
25 May 2016Read more >In the UK, deciding whether or not an invention belongs to an employee or an employer is governed the UK Patents Act 1977. Whilst it can be generally assumed that an invention which is produced during the course of normal duties of the employee belongs to the employer, it is interesting to consider how the […]
-
Clearing the way: the tests for obviousness and insufficiency clarified
20 May 2016Read more >A recent High Court decision explains the tests for obviousness and insufficiency resulting from a “clearing the way” action brought by Actavis against Eli Lilly (Lilly). Actavis intended to invalidate Lilly’s patent on the basis of a lack of inventive step and insufficiency. Lilly’s patent relates to the second medical use of atomoxetine in the […]
