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?
The Patents County Court has dismissed a claim that importing plastic microwave containers manufactured in China into the UK amounted to primary design right infringement (under s226 CDPA 1988), which prevents copying – exactly or substantially – of an unregistered design in the UK). The claim was inconsistent with the CDPA 1988 and the principle of territoriality of IP rights.
It was irrelevant that the manufacture overseas was with the “sole intention” of importing articles into the UK; primary infringement of design rights is not generally dependent on the “motive” of the perpetrator once sufficient copying is established.
It is unclear why the claimant failed to rely on section 227 CDPA 1988 (secondary infringement) in its claim, as this prevents importation without permission and for commercial purposes of an article which the importer knows, or has reason to believe, is an infringing article. Design right holders should ensure they carefully consider the basis of their claim at the outset when seeking to pursue an alleged infringer.
H&M is the latest retailer to confront its landlords about this ‘two tier retail market’ in an attempt to explore and negotiate more favourable terms.
View blog
Ann Summers is the latest retailer to have entered into new voluntary deals with the majority of their landlords, rather than using the CVA process.
We previously reported on the High Court decision of S Franses Ltd v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd in which it was held that a landlord’s motive could not prevent it from successfully utilising ‘ground (f)’ under s30(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 to oppose a lease renewal.
The FCA are encouraged to find that the implementation of the new rules has encouraged financial institutions to manage whistleblowing cases and concerns fairly, consistently and in a manner that protects the individual whistleblower.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up