NIPC Law

  Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (Mr David Stone)  Lutec (UK) Ltd and others v Cascade Holdings Ltd and another [2021] EWHC 1907 (Pat) (09 July 2021) This case started as an action for the infringement of two registered Community designs , namely 000540927-0001 and  000540927-0002 . Before the action came on for trial, the transition or implementation period provided by art 126 of the agreement by which the UK withdraw from the EU expired.   The Senior Courts of England and Wales ceased to be Community design courts and registered Community designs ceased to apply to the UK.  Art 54 (1) (b) of that agreement provided for holders of registered Community designs to be awarded equivalent registered designs in the UK (see Jane Lambert  How Brexit has changed IP Law   17 Jan 2021 NIPC Brexit and Jane Lambert IP after Brexit   26 Jan 2021 Slideshare). Those registered designs are for "Interior lights, Exterior lights...

There are often a lot of cases brought by the fashion trade or toy or novelty manufacturers in the run up to Christmas. There don't seem to have been all that many this year judging by the Chancery Division cause list and the Patent Court and Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ( "IPEC" ) diaries. However, there has been a case about ice cream or rather ice cream vans. In Whitby Specialist Vehicles Ltd. v Yorkshire v Yorkshire Specialist Vehicles Ltd   [2014] EWHC 4242 (Pat) the biggest manufacturer of ice cream vans in the UK sued one of its competitors or unregistered Community design, design right and trade mark infringement. The trial took place in the Patents Court on the 10, 12-14, 20 Nov 2014 and judgment was delivered on the 17 Dec 2014. Usually actions of this kind proceed in IPEC where trials are limited to two days and costs are capped at £50,000 for the trial on liability and £25,000 for ...

The "Denver" claimed as a work of artistic craftsmanship  in Hensher v Restawhile   [1976] AC 64 Source  Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law, Virtual Museum Despite the submissions of Sir Robin Jacob , leading academic lawyers, the IP Federation , the IP Bar Association  and the other intellectual property professions HM government seems determined to force through criminal sanctions for registered design and registered Community design infringement. Why HMG has set and indeed held to this course in the face of almost unanimous opposition from those who know most about intellectual property is a mystery but there it is. Governments do silly things sometimes of which the Dangerous Dogs Act is but one example. What happens next I have done all that I can as a citizen to persuade HMG to think again by   explaining in this blog why this proposal is a very bad idea ,  lobbying my MP  and even  remons...

Here is the email that I sent to my MP at 22:23 last night: "Dear Jason, You will shortly be required to consider the  Intellectual Property Bill  which was introduced into the House of Lords by Lord Younger, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Intellectual Property on 10 May 2013. I have analysed the Bill in detail and written a detailed commentary entitled  "The Intellectual Property Bill"  28 May 2013 which I hope you may find useful. The Bill contains a lot of useful provisions and is generally to be welcomed but it contains one provision, clause 13, which would create a new offence of infringing a registered design punishable by 10 years imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both.  During the consultation on the proposed provisions of the Bill, Sir Robin Jacob a former Lord Justice of the Court of Appeal and now a leading academic lawyer who is regarded by most as the greatest authority on IP law of the age, objected strenuously to the propo...

Two actions came before before Mr. Recorder Purvis in  Mainetti (UK) Ltd v Hangerlogic UK Limited [2012] EWPCC 42: a claim by Mainetti (UK) Limited ( "Mainetti" ) that Hangerlogic UK Limited ( "Hangerlogic" ) had infringed its three registered designs for various clothes hangers and a counterclaim by Hangerlogic for the revocation of those design registrations: and a. claim by Hangerlogic for a declaration that a modified range of garment hangers did not infringe Mainetti's registered designs and a counterclaim by Mainetti for infringement.of those registered designs. The recorder found for Mainetti in both sets of proceedings. The Registered Designs Mainetti's design registrations were as follows: Design number 2080944 for a garment hanger registered as of 5 Feb 1999: a 'clip hanger' used to suspend trousers, shorts and skirts from two clips ( "the clip design" ); Design number 2060713 for a garment hanger registered as o...

“Designing the Future” is the theme of this year’s World Intellectual Property Day 2011. In his message , Francis Gurry, the Director General of the WIPO, said: “Design touches every aspect of human creativity. It shapes the things we appreciate from traditional crafts to consumer electronics; from buildings and bicycles to fashion and furniture. Design has been called “intelligence made visible”. Design is where form meets function. It determines the look and feel of the products we use each day – from everyday household items to the latest tablet computers. Design marries the practical with the pleasing. It brings style to innovation.” In everyday language design can refer either to an object’s appearance or to the way it works. Thus, we speak of “fashion design” and “engine design”. The former is ornamental and the latter functional. Most countries protect ornamental design by one means or another. For example, EU member states are required by art 3 (1) of Directive 98/71...