Search for: "Smith v. Arnold"
Results 61 - 80
of 254
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Feb 2016, 5:02 am
The decision of Mr Justice Peter Smith in Sports Direct International plc v Rangers International Football Club plc and another [2016] EWHC 85 (Ch) to refuse to commit the respondent for contempt for alleged breach of an injunction shows the caution that the court will sometimes show when it comes to seeking to enforce injunctive relief. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 5:18 am
This then came before Arnold LJ in the Teva UK Limited and anor v Novartis AG [2022] EWCA Civ 1617 who agreed that no Arrow declaration should be made. [read post]
27 Apr 2008, 6:19 am
In Virginia v. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 6:31 am
Its reasoning for so holding is entirely consistent with the approach to section 60(2) laid down by the Court of Appeal in this country in Grimme v Scott and KCI v Smith & Nephew (see my previous judgment at [102]).Fourthly, the Court took into account (at [4.34]-[4.36]) the fact that Sun had not taken steps which it could have taken, but this does not appear to have been critical to its reasoning. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 6:06 am
Arnold, 280 Ga. 487, 489(5), 629 S.E.2d 807 (Georgia Supreme Court 2006) (citations and punctuation omitted).Smith v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 8:43 am
At the end of last month, the long-awaited judgment in the Interflora v Marks and Spencer case on trade mark infringement as it relates to keyword advertising was delivered by Mr Justice Arnold. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 3:36 pm
Thankfully, GuestKat Eibhlin Vardy will soon be reporting on the Court of Appeal's decision in Napp v Dr Reddy where the Court upheld Mr Justice Arnold's construction (see the first instance report by wonderful Kat friend Amy Crouch here). [read post]
20 Dec 2021, 6:01 am
" Brinsdon v. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 3:44 am
” Birss J endorsed Arnold J’s approach in reaching a similar conclusion in HTC v Gemalto [2013] EWHC 1876 (Pat). [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 3:27 am
This is the second of three blogs examining the recent UK Court of Appeal decision in Lidl v Tesco[1]. [read post]
20 Jan 2025, 11:29 am
Arnold LJ held that it was "illegitimate to dissect the Sign into its constituent elements for the purposes of applying section 11(2)(b), and to argue that, because some of those elements are descriptive, the Sign as a whole falls within section 11(2)(b)".As for the honest commercial defence, Arnold LJ referred to his list of factors set out in Samuel Smith v Lee and held that Aldi's packaging "was not in accordance with honest practices in… [read post]
17 Aug 2010, 9:42 am
Arnold, Judge.Representing Dougherty: Diane M. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 9:00 am
Mr Justice Arnold took the audience through the background of the case and the pleadings from both Sky and SkyKick. [read post]
27 May 2016, 3:02 am
Highlights include:Lambretta v Teddy Smith, where Etherton J in the High Court ruled that there was no design right or copyright in the colourways of a track topJacobson & Sons v Globe GB was a trade mark case relating to the flash on the side of Gola shoes - the registrations were held by Etherton J to be valid and infringedIn Cook Biotech Incorporated v Edwards Lifesciences AG, Etherton LJ in the Court of Appeal gave the leading judgment rejecting… [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 12:53 pm
As part of our quarterly teleseminar series, the Reed Smith Energy and Natural Resources group will provide insight into the top ten environmental and energy issues to watch in 2012. [read post]
29 Oct 2017, 4:09 pm
LEXIS 177873 and Smith v. [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 1:03 pm
There is some extra wattage here this morning for arguments in one of the marquee cases of the new term, Gill v. [read post]
29 Jan 2017, 10:00 am
Smith, 2017 U.S. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 1:10 pm
Arnold, Judge.Representing Appellant (Defendant): Dion J. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
Retromark Volume V: the last six months in trade marks1. [read post]
