Search for: "Oliver v. Reckitt & Colman, Inc."
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2015, 4:34 pm
Source Wikipedia In Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] 1 WLR 491, [1990] RPC 341, [1990] WLR 491, [1990] 1 All ER 873, [1990] UKHL 12, Lord Oliver said: "The law of passing off can be summarised in one short general [read post]
19 Mar 2021, 10:22 am
The test for passing off is set out in Lord Oliver’s judgment in Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] 1 WLR 491 and the present case turned on whether the defendants (counterclaimants) had goodwill in the word. [read post]
19 Mar 2021, 10:22 am
The test for passing off is set out in Lord Oliver’s judgment in Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] 1 WLR 491 and the present case turned on whether the defendants (counterclaimants) had goodwill in the word. [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 2:54 am
"The concerns noted by Lord Oliver in Reckitt & Colman Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] 1 All E.R. 873 have remained at the forefront of the judicial mind and whilst they have come in and out of vogue over the years, they are now accepted as a necessary evil in at least some circumstances.The survey question was recently considered in Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) & Anor v Sandoz Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 3196… [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 3:23 am
To prevail at common law, the plaintiff must prove that it has goodwill in the mark or get-up; there has been a misrepresentation by the defendant that leads the public to think that his goods or services are those of the plaintiff; and the plaintiff has suffered damage by virtue of the representation (Per Lord Oliver of Aylmerton n Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc.) [read post]
17 May 2015, 1:08 am
Three lemons: bad newsfor passing-off plaintiffsThe question to be decided at appeal was whether this reputation among a significant section of the public in the UK, in the absence of goodwill, was enough to form the basis of a successful passing off action where the remaining requirements of misrepresentation and damage in the classic Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] 1 WLR 491 ‘Jif Lemon’ trinity of criteria were satisfied. [read post]
