NIPC Law

Jane Lambert   Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (His Honour Judge Hacon) Luxe World Ltd v Touch of Vogue Ltd and another [2026] EWHC 148 (IPEC) (30 Jan 2026) S.26C (1) of the Registered Designs Act 1949 provides that proceedings in respect of an actionable threat may be brought against the person who made the threat for— (a) a declaration that the threat is unjustified; (b) an injunction against the continuance of the threat; (c) damages in respect of any loss sustained by the aggrieved person by reason of the threat. An "actionable threat" in this context means a threat to sue for infringing a registered design. S.26A (1) states that a threat of infringement proceedings made by any person is actionable by any person aggrieved by such a threat, subject to the provisions of subsections 26A (2) to (5). S.26 (1) adds that a communication contains a “threat of infringement proceedings” if a reasonable person in the position of a recipient would understand from the comm...

Vape Cloud Chasing Author VAPES   Licence CC BY-2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justice Miles)  Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd and others [2025] EWHC 1239 (Ch) (21 May 2025) Updated 16 May 2026 This was an application by Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd (Shenzhen) to restrain Bargain Busting Ltd ("BB") from threatening trade mark infringement proceedings against Shenzhen's distributors and retailers.  BB is the registered proprietor of UK trade marks  UK00003235344  and  UK00003534551 , which Shenzhen has challenged on the grounds of non-use and invalidity.  BB has also applied to register CRYSTAL BAR  as a trade mark under trade mark number UK00003786148 .  Shenzhen responded to BB's threats by seeking an order under s .21C  to prevent BB from making further threats of proceedings against Shenzhen's distributors and retailers.  It also sought information o...

Standard YouTube Licence Jane Lambert   Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor)  Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd and another     [2021] EWHC 491 (Pat) (4 March 2021) Yesterday I mentioned the cake war between Marks & Spencer and Aldi (see Jane Lambert Cake War s 17 April 2021 NIPC News).  Today I discuss the litigation between the suppliers of the Worldeez and LOL Surprise! toys,  If you have never heard of either, this video  LOLSurprise Lil Sister vs. Worldeez NEW! Who will win!?!   by Adulting With Children should enlighten you.  At the very least you should appreciate the children's pleasure as they unwrap their packages. The Dispute MGA's LOL Surprise! dolls appear to be well established in the UK market.  They are described at para [6] of Mr Justice Mellor's judgment in  Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd and another  [2021] EWHC 491 (Pat) (4 March 2021).  Cabo Concepts says that it had plan...

Houses of Parliament Source Wikipedia Jane Lambert The action arising from groundless threats has been one of the most perplexing features of our  intellectual property law  both for foreign owners of IPR in this country and their legal advisors (see Prince Plc v Prince Sports Group Inc [1998] FSR 21) and even non-specialist lawyers in the United Kingdom (see Brain v Ingeledew Brown Benson and Garrett and another  [1996] FSR 341). Under s.70 of the Patents Act 1977  and similar provisions in other IP legislation, a letter threatening proceedings that would be quite acceptable in most countries and even in the UK in respect of most other causes of action can land the lawyer or attorney who wrote it, and the client on whose behalf the letter was written, in a whole heap of trouble that sometimes results in an infringer getting away with his or her wrongdoing. S.70 (1) provides: "Where a person (whether or not the proprietor of, or entitled ...

According to drugs.com , pregabalin is an anti-epileptic drug which works by slowing down impulses in the brain that cause seizures. A European patent for the drug was granted to Warner-Lambert Co, LLC  ( "Warner-Lambert" )(now a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc . ) under EP number 0 641 330. That patent expired on 17 May 2013 but was extended by a supplementary protection certificate ( "SPC" ) until 17 May 2018. That SPC was allowed to lapse on 14 Oct 2013 and Warner-Lambert's data exclusivity in respect of the data used to obtain the marketing authorisation for prehabalin expired on 8 July 2014. Since then anybody has been free to make, import or sell pregabalin for treating epilepsy and generalized anxiety disorder in the United Kingdom and several companies including some of the parties to these proceedings have done just that. Drugs.com notes that pregabalin also affects chemicals in the brain that send pain signals across the nervous system. ...