Search for: "Commonwealth v. Arnold, S." Results 21 - 35 of 35
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2015, 7:00 am by Jocelyn Hutton
Arnold v Britton & Ors, heard 26 January 2015. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 4:05 am by Nedim Malovic
In response, Ineos further submitted that the shape of the signs applied for gives substantial value to the goods and so registration should also be refused on that ground.The present analysis only concerns the Court’s findings in relation to the inherent and acquired distinctiveness of the marks.The decisionInherent distinctivenessIn line with the principles set out in The Royal Mint Ltd v The Commonwealth Mint and Philatelic Bureau Ltd [2017] EWHC 417, the Court… [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:37 am
 Because the Regulation merely limited the "use" of trade marks they did not strip away the trade mark owner;s right to prevent or exclude others from using their mark (citing Arnold J in Pinterest v Premium Interest). [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:14 am
This Court chooses to apply comparison of two elements- a court order made known to the defendant and willful violation of that order as ruled in Commonwealth v. [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 2:01 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
If that’s right, it’s not obvious why we’d prioritize patent logic over TM logic. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:53 pm by Veronika Gaertner
The ECJ denies such a privilege, which is the correct decision in the author’s opinion, who, after having reviewed the ECJ’s judgement, also discusses the assignability of the decision to other conventions. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 1:00 pm by Benjamin Wittes
Earlier today, I had the pleasure of visiting Professor Jack Goldsmith’s “Foreign Relations Law” class, which is studying Hamdan v. [read post]