We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 36

IP case report for February 2015

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 25 2015

The GC upheld the BoA's decision to reject the application on the basis that the mark was devoid of distinctive character under Art 7(1)(b). The BoA

UK Parliament set to vote on introducing plain packing for tobacco products

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 6 2015

Following a recent Government announcement plain packaging legislation now looks set to be introduced in the UK. However, big questions still remain

IP case report for January 2015

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 1 2015

The GC partially annulled the BoA's finding that there was no likelihood of confusion between the marks under Art 8(1)(b). The BoA had correctly

IP case report - September 2014

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 17 2014

Birss J held that the use of the word PINK by Victoria's Secret on its clothing and as the name of its retail outlets infringed Thomas Pink's

Plain packaging plans advance in the UK and Ireland whilst the WTO dispute over Australia's laws also heats up

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • Australia, Ireland, United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 31 2014

On 10 June 2014 the Irish Government announced it will be the first country in the European Union to introduce plain packaging for tobacco products

Plain packaging: the lessons learned so far

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • Australia, European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 6 2014

On December 1 2012, Australia was the first country in the world to introduce rules on standardising packaging for tobacco products by excluding any

Token use not sufficient to protect TOMMY NUTTER mark from revocation

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 12 2013

Asplin J dismissed an appeal by Crombie from the decision of the Hearing Officer, finding that Crombie’s UK mark for TOMMY NUTTER should be revoked

Re-branding parallel imports

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 12 2013

Asplin J found that Doncaster had infringed the REGURIN trade mark (of which SEP was exclusive licensee in the UK and Ireland) by affixing the mark

Court of Appeal holds now mark invalid

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 12 2013

The Court of Appeal dismissed Starbucks' appeal from the decision of Arnold J in which he dismissed Starbucks' claims for trade mark infringement and

IPEC finds trade mark for Wishbone Ash valid and infringed

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 12 2013

Recorder Douglas Campbell found that Mr Powell's CTM for WISHBONE ASH (the 'Mark') had not been registered in bad faith. He also dismissed Mr