Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
Research carried out by Which? found more than 150 own-label products had ‘borrowed’ elements of their packaging from branded competitors.
It found one-fifth of its members had accidently bought an own-brand version of a favourite brand at least once; with a further 18% deliberately buying own-label products because it resembled the branded equivalent.
It’s an offence under Consumer Protection Regulations to promote a product similar to a product made by a particular manufacturer in such a manner as deliberately to mislead the consumer into believing the product is made by that same manufacturer.
Currently a company needs to persuade a regulator to take enforcement action if this offence has been committed, and the appetite for that has traditionally been low.
There has been lobbying for many years for a private right of redress where this offence has been committed. This research may assist companies in highlighting that it is imperative something is done to plug this gap as brands continue to be exploited.
Break rights have proved a fertile source of litigation over the last few years. More often than not, tenants have found themselves on the wrong end of the decisions. However, a Court of Appeal decision yesterday has bucked that trend.
View blog
One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.
Landlords should reconsider summary judgment if a Part 26A restructuring plan is pending.
A landlord’s claim for summary judgment to recover rent and service charge arrears accrued since the start of the pandemic against a non-essential retailer succeeded. Like London buses, a second such case has followed hot on its heels.
Partner and Head of Real Estate
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up