Browne Jacobson duo named Intellectual Property Rising Stars
Two of Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property associates Nick Smee and Giles Parsons have been named ‘Rising Stars’ by leading IP publication Managing Intellectual Property.
Two of Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property associates Nick Smee and Giles Parsons have been named ‘Rising Stars’ by leading IP publication Managing Intellectual Property.
The annual guide highlights some of the world’s up and coming IP practitioners. This year’s listing is based on comprehensive research carried out amongst clients and peers for the 2018/19 edition of IP Stars.
Associate Nick Smee joined the firm from Gowling in May 2017 and specialises in both contentious and non-contentious legal matters across a range of sectors including automotive, manufacturing, retail & leisure and life sciences. He has particular experience in big ticket litigation; most recently this included acting for Comic Enterprises in its dispute with Twentieth Century Fox over hit TV show 'Glee'.
Giles Parsons joined the firm as a trainee and is one of the team’s most senior associates specialising in intellectual property dispute resolution, including patents, confidential information, trade marks and passing off, designs and copyright. His notable cases include leading a successful trade mark infringement claim in the IPEC court on behalf of Moet Hennessy. Giles is ranked in Legal 500 for brand management and intellectual property.
Declan Cushley, head of the commercial and intellectual property team, said
“We are delighted for Nick and Giles who thoroughly deserve this recognition.
“They are two outstanding associates and their inclusion in this year’s listing is just reward for a tremendous work ethic, commitment to their personal development and delivering exceptional client service.
“We have always placed a strong focus on nurturing and supporting exceptional young talent and we look forward to seeing both of them continue to develop their careers with us.”
Browne Jacobson’s 20-strong national specialist IP practice extends over offices in London, Birmingham and Nottingham. Its extensive experience spans the whole range of IP rights from various trade mark, design, patent and copyright infringement matters to R&D and collaboration agreements and a premium client portfolio that includes: Mace, Marstons, London EV Company Limited, Aston Martin and PZ Cussons (St.Tropez & Charles Worthington), amongst others.
Contact

Henrietta Scott
Head of Marketing
henrietta.scott@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)330 045 2299
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Online Event
Data Shared Insights: Information sharing – why, when, how?
Legal Update
ICO consultation on fertility tracking apps
Published Article
UK: Legal issues with deepfakes
Published Article
The reasons for asset-based lending’s growing acceptance as a preferred funding source
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s patent litigation team praised for being “dynamic” and a “major player” in IAM Patent 1000 guide
Legal Update
Harnessing the potential of knowledge exchange, research and innovation
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise on international sale of entertainment company Music For Pets
Legal Update
New guidance for employers on Subject Access Requests published by the ICO
Legal Update
Ali Round 2 - High Court gives further guidance on causation and quantum for data breaches
Press Release
Browne Jacobson welcomes former ICO lawyer to support growing UK&I data privacy and tech practice
Legal Update
Update on data protection claims - Austrian Post Case
Opinion
Practical points from High Court ruling that Tesco has infringed Lidl’s IP rights in its famous yellow circle logo
Legal Update
Knowledge exchange and intellectual property
Press Release
Browne Jacobson launches specialist Ascensus programme for in house lawyers and business leaders
Opinion
Mopping up after a leak – how businesses can take steps to protect their confidential information
Legal Update
Cyber security and data breaches
Online Event
Register your interest to join our next Home Delivery Academy
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Legal Update
Update on the Digital Services Act (“DSA”) – Important Dates and Deadlines Looming
Legal Update
Government publishes its proposals for expanding the Scope of the Network and Information Systems Regulations 2018
Legal Update
Protecting children and their data in the online environment
Press Release
Court of Appeal makes plea for legally enforceable arbitration for FRAND disputes
In the ongoing complex litigation between Optis Cellular Technology LLC and Apple Inc., the Court of Appeal ([2022] EWCA Civ 1411) has upheld the High Court’s findings that implementers of standard-essential patents (SEPs) cannot refuse to accept a FRAND license and continue activities in the meantime which constitute infringement: that party must commit to accept a court-determined license if it wishes to avoid an injunction.
Published Article
AI generated designs on retail products
Every AI will have its own terms of use. DALL·E 2’s Terms of Use dated 3 November 2022 specify that as between a user and Open AI, a user owns their prompts and uploads. Open AI also assigns to the user all rights in any images generated by DALL·E 2 for that user (subject to the user complying with those Terms of Use, and to a licence to use inputs and output to develop and improve the services).
Published Article
Bruce Willis AI and the problem with deepfakes
A deepfake of Bruce Willis is advertising Russian mobile phones. Many great artistic and metaphysical questions are raised by this performance. However, this article is going to look at the intellectual property law implications, from a UK perspective.
Legal Update
DSA approved: Targeted Advertising Rules explained
Legal Update
Economic crime and cybercrime
It is clear that the digital landscape, often termed cyberspace, is a man-made environment, in which human behaviour dominates and where technology both influences and aids our role in it — through the internet, telecoms and networked computer systems, which are often interdependent. The extent to which any organisation is potentially vulnerable to cyber-attack depends on how well these elements are aligned.
Legal Update
Data reform in the UK
Since the UK left the EU and are now able to move away from the EU data protection regime, the UK government have implemented a national data strategy with the aim of reducing the burden on organisations but maintaining a high data protection standard.
Legal Update
Are local authority companies subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000?
In this article we look at local authority companies and whether they are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. And for those that are, what information are they legally obliged to submit.
Legal Update
Digital Markets Act and Data Platforms - FRANDs for life?
The Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”) joins the dots between competition law and data protection law and actively targets data-driven platforms. It is also a comprehensive regulation to take note of, with familiar GDPR-style fines tied to turnover.
Legal Update
Avoiding the pitfalls of WhatsApp
The use of social media platforms and applications can have overwhelmingly positive benefits for public bodies. However, regulatory action recently taken by the Information Commissioner, has highlighted various pitfalls that public bodies should seek to avoid if allowing staff to use social media as a communication tool.
Legal Update
ICO consultation on research provisions guidance
The data protection legislation (namely, the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018) contain various provisions that deal with the processing of personal data for research purposes.
On-Demand
NFTs and Smart Contracts - an in-house lawyers perspective
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s IP experts shine silver in world’s leading trade mark lawyer rankings
Browne Jacobson’s national IP lawyers are celebrating after being ranked in the 2022 World Trademark Review (WTR) 1000 - the independent guide which recognises leading trade mark experts across key jurisdictions around the globe.
Opinion
Are whistleblowers entitled to keep their employer’s confidential documents?
In Nissan v Passi, the High Court recently considered the issue of an employee retaining confidential documents belonging to his former employer in the context of the employer’s application for an injunction seeking the return of such documents from the employee.
Legal Update
More good news for data controllers: High Court finds local authority not vicariously liable for the actions of social worker who went off on a "frolic of her own"
Published Article
Five top tips for strong data compliance in 2022
This article has five excellent top tips for strong data compliance in 2022, including; embracing near misses, leading from the top, outcomes-focused training, learning walks, consequences.
Legal Update
Stemming the tide of data breach claims: good news for data controllers
The cases summarised give considerable comfort to data controllers seeking to defend themselves against claims that relate to breaches arising as a result of a failure rather than a direct act and/or are based on assertions of damage or distress that are exaggerated, unsubstantiated or bear little relation to the breach itself.
Press Release
Reaction: Supreme Court rules in favour of Google
The Supreme Court has unanimously overturned the Court of Appeal’s 2019 decision in the case Lloyd (Respondent) v Google LLC (Appellant) which allowed the claimant, Mr Lloyd, to serve a representative action on Google on behalf of over four million iPhone users who were seeking damages for ‘loss of control’ of personal data.
Published Article
Tipping the balance: Assessing patent infringement
In July this year, four years to the month after its introduction into UK law in the Supreme Court’s seminal judgment in Actavis v Eli Lilly, the court handed down its latest decision applying the ‘doctrine of equivalents’.
Published Article
Court of Appeal upholds decision that AI machines cannot be ‘inventors’
The Court of Appeal has held that an AI machine cannot be named as the ‘inventor’ of a patent, because it is not a ‘natural person’, and is therefore also incapable of transferring the right in that patent to a person.