Posts

Showing posts with the label art 10

Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers - The Mail's Appeal

Image
Century and Harbor Freeway Interchange Author Remi Jouan   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Dame Victoria Sharp, President, Lord Justice Bean)  HRH the Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1810 (2 Dec 2021) This was an appeal against the decisions of Mr Justice Warby in  HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 273 (Ch)  on 11 Feb 2021 and HRH Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd . [2021] EWHC 1245 (Ch) on 12 May 2021.   I discussed those judgments in  Summary Judgment - Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers   and   Copyright - Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd   on 12 Feb and 13 June 2021 respectively.  The Litigation The duchess sued the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and the MailOnline after they had reproduced and commented upon large passages from a handwritten letter ...

Practice - Manchester United v Sega

Image
Steve Garry from Manchester, United Kingdom / CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ) Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justice Morgan) Manchester United Football Club Ltd v Sega Publishing Europe Ltd and another  [2020] EWHC 1439 (Ch) (4 June 2020) This was an application by Manchester United Football Club ("MUFC") for permission to amend its particulars of claim.  The Club has already brought proceedings against Sega Publishing Europe Ltd. ("Sega") and Sports Interactive Ltd. ("SI") alleging infringements of  its EU trade marks  EU1333640  and  EU761312  under art 9 (2)  (a) and (c) of   Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (Text with EEA relevance) OJ L 154, 16.6.2017, p. 1–99 and passing off.  The amendment that it sought would have added a new cause of action under art 10. SI had developed a game call...

Sunk! The Court of Human Rights rejects the Pirate Bay's Complaint

Image
Fredrik Neij and Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi founded one of the world's largest file sharing sites known as The Pirate Bay . They were prosecuted for offences under the Swedish copyright act ( Upphovsrättslagen , 1960:729)  and in the same process sued by various record companies and other copyright owners for copyright infringement in the Stockholm district cour t ( Tingsrätt ). After a hearing that lasted from the 16 Feb until 3 March 2009 they were found guilty of the charges and sentenced to a year's imprisonment on 17 April 2009. They were also ordered to pay damages of SEK30 million to the copyright owners. They appealed to the Swedish court of appeal ( ( Svea hovrätt ) which upheld their convictions but reduced their sentences and increased the damages award on 26 Nov 2010. They applied for permission to appeal to the Swedish supreme court ( Högsta domstolen ) but that court rejected their application on 1 Feb 2012. On 20 June 2012 Mr. Neij and Mr. Kolmisoppi complaine...

Super Injunctions: Ntuli v Donald

A super injunction is one in which an anonymized applicant is granted an injunction restraining an anonymized respondent from doing specified but unpublishable things and further restraining the respondent and others from publishing the fact that the injunction had been sought and obtained. In Ntuli v Donald [2010] EWCA Civ 1276 (16 Nov 2010) the appellant Adakini Ntuli sought to overturn an order by Mr. Justice Eady restraining her from publishing, using or disclosing scheduled categories of confidential information, the existence of the proceedings or the identity of the parties. The information itself concerned details of the Ntuli's personal relationship with Howard Donald of "Take That". After their relationship came to an end, Ntuli sent Donald the following text: "Why shud I continue 2 suffer financially 4 the sake of loyalty when selling my story will sort my life out?" She then engaged the publicist Max Clifford whereupon Donald applied to Mr. Justi...