Search for: "Arnold v. Alexander"
Results 1 - 20
of 73
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Oct 2023, 4:18 pm
On 25 August 2023, the Court of Appeal Nicola Davies, Arnold and Warby LJJ) handed down judgment in Blake & ors v Fox [2023] EWCA Civ 1000. [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 3:52 am
Mr Hobbs QC considered the relevant authorities including the judgment of Arnold J in Red Bull GmbH v Sun Mark Ltd [2012] EWHC 1929 (Ch) at [130] to [138] and the EU General Court's decision in Copernicus Trademarks (Case T‑82/14) ECLI:EU:T:2016:396. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 5:05 pm
As we head into a hot holiday weekend, here are some appellate items to explore:Today's DJ has Justice Moore's piece on Jackie Robinson, United States v. 2LT Jack R Robinson as well as Marc Alexander's book review: Notorious RBG Talks Life, Love, Liberty, and LawThe Recorder's On Appeals column has Katy Graham's The Far-Reaching Effects of a Landmark Decision on the Standard of Appellate Review for Clear and Convincing Evidence.Tuesday's… [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 3:45 am
For those of you eager to hear what's going on you can tune in live online to the Supreme Court hearing where you can see the mighty Tom Mitcheson QC (supported by Andrew Waugh QC and leading Stuart Baran) for Eli Lilly take on eloquent Danny Alexander QC (leading Thomas Raphael QC) for Actavis. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 7:00 am
(R v. [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]
17 Apr 2024, 1:14 am
In the third (and final) of our blogs reporting on the UK Court of Appeal decision in Lidl v Tesco, we examine the findings in relation to non-use revocation. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 10:48 pm
Daniel Alexander QC’s judgment in Meter-Tech v British Gas [2016] EWHC 2278 (Pat) reiterates that, where a party alleges obviousness over CGK alone, it must clearly set out what it alleges the CGK to be in its statement of case. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 6:53 am
Speakers include Mr Justice Arnold (High Court of Justice, London), Judge Rian Kalden (Court of Appeal of The Hague), Hon. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 7:13 am
He referred in particular to comments by Laddie J in Mercury Communications Ltd v Mercury Interactive (UK) Ltd [1995] FSR 850, at 863-865; by Jacob J in Laboratoire De La Mer Trade Marks [2002] FSR 51, at [19]; and by Aldous LJ in Thomson Holidays v Norwegian Cruise Line [2002] EWCA Civ 1828; [2003] RPC 32, at [29]. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 10:15 am
Whitby Specialist Vehicles v Yorkshire Specialist Vehicles. [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 3:56 am
In Montres Breguet SA v Samsung Electronics, the owners of Swatch (and various other watch brand trade marks), objected to Samsung providing third-party watch faces on their Galaxy App Store featuring Swatch’s marks (the “Marks”). [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 2:23 am
Tobias is also letting us have a copy of an English translation of Kecofa v Lancôme. [read post]
22 Jun 2020, 8:51 am
’” Alexander v. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 12:43 am
Blame old geezers like me | Mr Justice Arnold to become Lord Justice Arnold: congratulations! [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 9:28 am
IPKat friend, Alexander de Leeuw (Brinkhof) reports on the latest installment in the Netherlands.Over to Alex:"On 19 June 2019 the Dutch District Court of The Hague – the Court with exclusive jurisdiction over patent matters in the Netherlands – issued a decision in merits proceedings between Eli Lilly & Company and Fresenius Kabi regarding Fresenius’ pemetrexed product (a machine translation as published by Mattie de Koning of Simmons is found here). [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 1:41 am
Comment The Court of Appeal noted that it was unfortunate that the trial judge was not referred to Hallen v Brabantia. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 9:22 am
(Accent Delight), an offshore company with Dmitry Rybolovlev as the ultimate beneficial owner, v. [read post]
16 Feb 2018, 12:45 am
| Bad faith confirmed for ALEXANDER trade mark application? [read post]
9 Mar 2018, 3:04 am
The same criticism was raised in a decision by Mr Justice Arnold in Dyson Limited v Vax Limited [2010] EWHC 1923 (see [30],[31]).The German case law now seems to be on the brink of changing. [read post]
