Search for: "Kitchin v. Kitchin"
Results 61 - 80
of 292
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Nov 2013, 9:09 am
Well, we now have another (minor) comment on the issue from Lord Justice Kitchin in Faizi v Greenside Properties Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1382 (only on Case Track from what I can see).Mr & Mrs Farzi appear to have been the leasehold owners of a flat in a building owned by Greenside. [read post]
13 Nov 2013, 9:09 am
Well, we now have another (minor) comment on the issue from Lord Justice Kitchin in Faizi v Greenside Properties Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1382 (only on Case Track from what I can see).Mr & Mrs Farzi appear to have been the leasehold owners of a flat in a building owned by Greenside. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 4:28 am
As Kitchin LJ concluded:"39. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 7:19 pm
On 3 April 2019 the Supreme Court gave its judgment in Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 1:26 am
To put things in more simplistic terms, as described by Lord Justice Kitchin: "...it was [Rihanna's] case that the misrepresentation that she was associated with the t-shirt made it more attractive and so played a material part in the decision of the public to buy it".Lord Kitchin turned to the earlier decision in Edmund Irvine Tidswell Ltd v Talksport Ltd, where Justice Laddie formulated two criteria that needed to be established for a successful case… [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 7:05 am
Indeed, said the questioner, given the potential of that reference to the CJEU to undermine Kitchin LJ’s “free-flowing” analysis in Cartier it was surprising that Kitchin LJ made no mention of it in his judgment.All these costs ... who covers them? [read post]
6 Jul 2016, 4:04 am
"Kitchin LJ concluded that all threshold conditions were satisfied in this case.Principles and ... costsTurning then to the principles to be applied in considering whether to make a website blocking order, namely the relief must: (i) be necessary; (ii) be effective; (iii) be dissuasive; (iv) not be unnecessarily complicated or costly; (v) avoid barriers to legitimate trade; (vi) be fair and equitable and strike a “fair balance” between the applicable… [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 8:46 am
You won't find it on BAILII, but today's decision of Mr Justice Kitchin in in Paul Allen (trustee of Adrian Jacobd, deceased) v Bloomsbury Publishing and JK Rowling [2010] EWHC 2560 (Ch) (Chancery Division, England and Wales) is brought to you here by the IPKat himself as an act of kindness. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 5:51 am
Before getting to the Supreme Court the subject matter of the case has been subject to at least five decisions (two of which will be subject to the scrutiny of the Supreme Court):Dispute about the jurisdiction of DNIsNovember 2012: Mr Justice Arnold said he had jurisdiction to hear DNIs with respect of the foreign designations of the Lilly patent (see decision here and AdvoKat summary here)May 2013: A Court of Appeal consisting of Lord Justices Kitchin, Lloyd and Longmore upheld… [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 3:59 am
Kitchin LJ giving the leading judgment, with which Moses LJ and Longmore LJ agreed in the traditional formula, analysed each criticism of the judge's findings, and in each case upheld the first instance judgment. [read post]
11 Mar 2020, 5:43 pm
The Supreme Court will hear the libel appeal in Serafin v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 4:33 am
Indeed, Vogue was right and in fact today the Court of Appeal issued its decision in Fenty v Arcadia, confirming Birss J's judgment and holding that "the sale by Topshop of the t-shirt amounted to passing off. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 3:45 am
If you do not wish to read all the myriad of decisions, the AmeriKat has re-summarized the 5 year (and then some) war between the companies as follows:Dispute about the jurisdiction of DNIsNovember 2012: Mr Justice Arnold said he had jurisdiction to hear DNIs with respect of the foreign designations of the Lilly patent (see decision here and AdvoKat summary here)May 2013: A Court of Appeal consisting of Lord Justices Kitchin, Lloyd and Longmore upheld Mr Justice Arnold… [read post]
17 Dec 2015, 3:46 am
Permission was however granted by Kitchin LJ in August 2015. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 2:15 pm
(Ironically, patent specialist Lord Kitchin is a member of the Supreme Court but will not be sitting in this case as it is his own judgment that is under appeal.) [read post]
8 Jul 2015, 8:09 am
Yet Kitchin LJ took the opposite view - "Once again this is a factor which undermines Smith & Nephew's favoured interpretation of the claim. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 4:36 am
The judgment of the court was delivered by Kitchin LJ. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 4:54 pm
Today’s decision of the Court of Appeal in Apimed Medical Honey Ltd v Brightwake Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 5 is refreshingly straightforward. [read post]
10 Jul 2016, 1:54 am
Since the first instance decision, we have seen the High Court fashion new forms of injunction, most recently in the form of the notification order in Holyoake and another v Candy and others. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 11:33 am
Or did, until today.That case has now given us Shanks v Unilever Plc & Ors [2019] UKSC 45 (23 October 2019) in which Lord Kitchin (with whom the other Supremes, unsurprisingly given his background in IP law, agreed) warned that tribunals “should be very cautious before accepting a submission that a patent has not been of outstanding benefit to an employer simply because it has had no significant impact on its overall profitability or the value of all of its sales”.A… [read post]
