NIPC Law

Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Lewison and Arnold and Mr Justice Marcus Smith) Bentley Motors Limited v Bentley 1962 Limited and another [2020] EWCA Civ 1726 (16 Dec2020) This was an appeal by Bentley Motors Limited against Judge Hacon's decision in Bentley 1962 Ltd and another v Bentley Motors Ltd [2019] EWHC 2925 (Ch) (1 Nov 2019) which I discussed in Trade Marks - Bentley 1962 Ltd and another v Bentley Motors Ltd.   on 3 Nov 2019.  In that decision, the learned judge held that Bentley Motors had infringed trade mark numbers  1180215 ,    2177779A  and  2505233  by marketing and distributing clothing and headgear with the word "BENTLEY" in combination with the motor company's winged "B" emblem. The above picture is an example of the use of the combination to which the claimants objected. Grounds of Appeal Bentley Motors' grounds of appeal were as follows.  First, the judge had been wrong to hold that the average consumer of...

Royal Courts of Justice Photo Michael Reeve Creative Commons Licence Jane Lambert Perry v F H Brundle and Others [2017] EWHC 678 (IPEC) (30 March 2017) Para 1 of the Part 3C Practice Direction, which is made pursuant to CPR 3.11 , enables the court to make a range of orders known as "civil restraint orders" against a party which has issued claims or made applications that are totally without merit. Each of those orders restricts access to the courts. They are known respectively as: a limited civil restraint order ; an extended civil restraint order ; and a general civil restraint order . I discussed the jurisdiction to make those orders in Civil Restraint Orders in IPEC - Perry v Brundle   12 Oct 2015. Readers will see that the most restrictive of those orders is the general civil restraint order which restrains the person against whom it is made from issuing any claim or making any application in the High Court or the County Court...

CPR 3.11 provides: "A practice direction may set out – (a) the circumstances in which the court has the power to make a civil restraint order against a party to proceedings; (b) the procedure where a party applies for a civil restraint order against another party; and (c) the consequences of the court making a civil restraint order." Neither the rule nor the glossary defines "civil restraint orders" but para 1 of Practice Direction 3C - Civil Restraint Orders refers to limited civil restraint orders, extended civil restraint orders and general civil restraint orders. Those orders restrict the proceedings that can be issued, and the applications that can be made, by the person against whom they are issued without the permission of the court. Para 3.2 (1) of the Practice Direction provides: "Unless the court otherwise orders, where the court makes an extended civil restraint order, the party against whom the order is made – (1) w...