NIPC Law

Manchester Civil Justice Centre Author Skip88  Licence Public Domain Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Lewison, Phillips and Snowdon) Cheshire Estate & Legal Ltd. v Blanchfield and others [2024] EWCA Civ 1317 (5 Nov 2024) This was an appeal from the judgment of His Honour Judge Bever sitting in Manchester as a judge of the High Court. The learned judge had dismissed with costs a claim by Cheshire Estate & Legal Ltd. ("Cheshire Estate") against two of its former directors and the company that they were setting up for conspiracy and breach of fiduciary, contractual and confidential duties. The Alleged Wrongdoing The defendants were accused of taking preliminary steps to set up a competing enterprise before they had resigned as Cheshire Estate's directors. Those steps included registering the trading name of the new business, incorporating the company as the corporate vehicle for their venture, appointing themselves as directors

Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ( Ian Karet)   Equisafety Ltd v Woof Wear Ltd [2024] EWHC 2478 (IPEC) (25 Sept 2024) This was an action by the Wirral-based company Equisafety Ltd ("Equisafety") for infringement of copyright in three high-visibility ("high vis") equestrian products. These were a waistcoat, an elasticated hat band, and a neckband for a horse some of which are shown in the above photos. The defendant, Woof Wear Ltd ("Woof Wear"), had exhibited similar goods at the Beta International Exhibition .  Woof Wear admitted that if copyright subsisted in those items and if the claimant company owned those copyrights then it would have infringed those rights.   Consequently, the issues to be tried were whether copyright subsisted in those high-vis items and, if it did, whether Equisafety owned those copyrights. The Preliminary Hearing At a hearing before Ms Pat Treacy on or about 24 Jan 2024, Equisafety was ordered to identify the

Jane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon) Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH and others v Aspire Pharma Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 711 (Pat) (27 March 2024) Rivaroxaban  is an anticoagulant medication used to treat and prevent blood clots, particularly deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary emboli and atrial fibrillation after hip or knee surgery.  Until the hearing of this application Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH, its holding and associated companies enjoyed a monopoly of the market for rivaroxaban in the UK, That was because Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH held a patent for the product as a compound which was extended until 1 April 2024 by a supplementary protection certificate. Aspire Pharma Ltd.  was one of several pharmaceutical companies that hoped to supply generic rivaroxaban upon the expiry of the SPC.  However, Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH also held European patent number 1 845 961 B1 for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders with rivaroxaban  which covered the use o

Author  Basher Eyre #   Lixnxw  CC BY-SA 2. 0 Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Moylan, Arnold and Phillips)  Panasonic Holdings Corporation v Xiaomi Technology UK Ltd and others [2024] EWCA Civ 1143 (3 Oct 2024) On 31 July 2023, Panasonic Holdings Corporation ("Panasonic") issued proceedings against Xiaomi Technology UK Ltd., its holding and two associated companies (Xiaomi) for declarations that certain of its patents were essential to one or more ETSI telecommunications standards, that they had been infringed by Xiaomi, that the terms on which it was willing to license patents were fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") or could become FRAND after some adjustments and injunctions against Xianomi if those companies rejected those terms.  On 8 Nov 2024 after a hearing before Mr Justice Meade his lordship ordered a 10 to 15-day trial to be listed in October 2024 limited to the determination of the terms of the court-determined licence and stay

succ   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justic Fancourt)  easyGroup Ltd v Easyfundraising Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 2323 (Ch) (11 Sept 2024) This was a number of claims and counterclaims between the claimant,  easyGroup Ltd   ("easyGroup"), and the defendants, Easyfundraising Ltd , ("EFL"), The Support Group (UK) Ltd., Ian Woodroffe ("Mr Woodroffe") and Palatine Private Equity Ltd ("Palatine"). The claims were for trade mark infringement and passing off. The counterclaims were for revocation and invalidity of easyGroup's marks. The Parties easyGroup administers or licenses the use of trade marks consisting of the adjective word "easy" which is usually in lowercase letters followed by the description of a business activity beginning with a capital letter as in easyJet, easy easyHotel or easyRentacar.  easyGroup owns and manages a large number of those marks which are used by its associate companies. EFL describes itself as "