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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 11-20 of 23

Cephalon Inc v Orchid Europe Ltd: generics, interim injunctions and “clearing the way”
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • February 28 2011

The High Court of England and Wales has refused to grant an interim injunction to Cephalon against Orchid Europe Ltd's generic version of Cephalon's patented sleeping disorders drug, modafinil


Long v Comptroller General of Patents: insufficiency and ambiguity
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

Ms Long filed a patent application for an invention that provided car parks with an indicator for showing whether a space was occupied


Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA: comparative advertising and products sold in supermarkets
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • January 25 2011

The fact that there are differences in the extent to which you might like to eat certain food products depending on their place of production, the ingredients and who produced them, does not, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has said in Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA C-15909, preclude the possibility that an advertisement comparing such products (by reference to price alone, as opposed by reference to any of their other attributes) will fall within the boundaries of permitted comparative advertising, provided the advertisement is not misleading


Mediaprint Zeitungs- und Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH & Co KG v Österreich-Zeitungsverlag GmbH: prize promotions and unfair commercial practices
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • January 25 2011

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Mediaprint Zeitungsund Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH & Co KG v Österreich- Zeitungsverlag GmbH C-54008 has held that the possibility of participating in a prize competition, linked to the purchase of a newspaper, does not constitute an unfair commercial practice within the meaning of Article 5(2) of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (200529EC), simply on the ground that that is what induced some of the consumers concerned to buy the newspaper in the first place


Spiller v Joseph: defamation and “honest comment"
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

The Supreme Court of England and Wales in Spiller v Joseph 2010 UKSC 53 has declined to alter radically the defence of "fair comment" in libel claims


The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Meltwater Holding BV: online commercial media monitoring services and the end user licence debate
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

This ruling from Mrs Justice Proudman confirms that businesses using an online commercial media monitoring service require a licence from the Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd


Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd v Asda Stores Ltd: Asda “rides on the coat-tails” of Specsavers’ reputation
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

In October 2009, Asda re-launched its optician services through a marketing campaign featuring the following logo and the straplines "be a real spec saver at Asda" and "spec savings at Asda"


La Chemise Lacoste SA and Baker Street Clothing Ltd (ALLIGATOR): word and device marks, conceptual similarity and likelihood of confusion
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

In La Chemise Lacoste SA and Baker Street Clothing Ltd (ALLIGATOR) BL 0-333-10 16 September 2010, Geoffrey Hobbs QC allowed an appeal by Baker Street Clothing Ltd in respect of its opposed applications to register the word ALLIGATOR as a UK trade mark


Unilever plc v Ian Alexander Shanks: calculating employee compensation
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

Professor Shanks made an invention patented by his employer, Unilever UK Central Resources Ltd (CRL


ITV Broadcasting Ltd v tv Catch Up Ltd: communication to the public of a broadcast
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2011

Refusing the Defendant's application for summary judgment in ITV Broadcasting Ltd v TV Catch Up Ltd 2010 EWHC 3063 (Ch), Mr Justice Kitchin has held that, as regards broadcasts, the meaning of communication to the public within Section 20 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 is not limited to broadcasts but extends to all communications by electronic means, whether one-to-one or one-to-many