NIPC Law

Tipstaff By Simon Speed - Originally uploaded through the Britain Loves Wikipedia website. Public Domain,  h ttps://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10585201   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (HH Judge Paul Matthews)  Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd and others [2026] EWHC 933 (Ch) (23 April 2026) These were applications by Shenzgen SKE Technology Limited ("SST") and their trade mark attorneys to strike out an application by Bargain Busting Ltd. ("BBL") to commit them to prison for contempt of court.  There was also a cross-application from BBL to add another of SST's trade mark attorneys as an additional respondent to the contempt proceedings. Alleged Contempt The alleged contempt was "Criminal contempt (intentional interference with the administration of justice) by seeking to prevent or delay the registration of a trademark as directed by the High Court." BBL had applied to register CRYSTAL BAR as a UK trade mark.  SST opp...

The Rolls Building , L ocation of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Author Muhammad Karns, Judicial Office X feed Licence CC BY-SA 4.0 Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (HH Judge Hacon)  Edozo Ltd v Valos (UK) Ltd [2026] EWHC 93 (IPEC) (21 Jan 2026) This was an application by the claimant to strike out parts of the defendant's defence and counterclaim. The claimant had brought proceedings for a declaration of non-infringement of copyright, while the defendant counterclaimed for relief from infringement.     The claimant's application came before His Honour Judge Hacon on 15 Jan 2026.  By para [61] of his judgment in  Edozo Ltd v Valos (UK) Ltd [2026] EWHC 93 (IPEC) (21 Jan 2026), His Honour acceded to the application. The Parties The claimant was Edozo Ltd ( "Edozo" ) and the defendant was Valos (UK) Ltd . (" Valos ").  The judge described Edozo and Valos as "competitors in a market which...

Entrance to the Rolls Building where IPEC sits By Muhammad Karns - Judicial Office Twitter feed., CC BY-SA 4.0,  https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=78284579   Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (Recorder Amanda Michaels)  Leeds Plywood & Doors Ltd v Deanta UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 1376 (IPEC) (3 Jun 2025) This transcript records Recorder Amanda Michaels's judgments in two interim applications: The defendant's application to strike out certain paragraphs of the claimant's managing director's witness statement and a cross-application by the claimant to strike out part of the witness statement of one of the defendant's witnesses; and  The claimant's application for specific disclosure. These applications seem to have been made at a very late stage because the recorder said at para [3] of her judgment that the trial was to take place in July.  The cause of action is not made clear, but as both parties make doors and there are references ...

  Jane Lambert Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (Pat Treacy)  JBC Distributors Inc and another v Mudahy (t/a Pak Cosmetic Centre) and another [2023] EWHC 1480 (IPEC) (23 June 2023) This was an application for summary judgement on a claim for trade mark infringement and the striking out of a defence and counterclaim for groundless threats and reimbursement for unsold stocks returned by Sainsbury's The applications came on before Pat Treacy sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court on 9 June 2023.   By para [43] of her judgment which she handed down on 23 June 2023, the learned deputy judge dismissed the summary judgment application and the application to strike out the defence (see J BC Distributors Inc and another v Mudahy (t/a Pak Cosmetic Centre) and another [2023] EWHC 1480).  She also struck out the counterclaim for reimbursement for unsold stocks but not the counterclaim for unjustified threats. The Claim The claimant is the registered proprietor...

Author Paste   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0     Soutce Wikimedia   Jane Lambert intellectual Property Enterprise Court  (John Kimbell QC)  Photobooth Props Ltd and another v NEPBH Ltd and others    [2022] EWHC 750 (IPEC) (1 April 2022) These were interlocutory applications by both claimants and defendants in an action for copyright infringement and rescission of a contract. The works alleged to have been infringed were artwork for the panels on the outside of photo booths known as "skins". The claimants claimed copyright in works that had been made by one Lie Xie, a director of the second claimant, whch were referred to as "the new works" and works in which copyright was said to have been assigned to the second claimant by the first defendant known as "the assigned works". The claimants applied for summary judgment under CPR Part 24  of their copyright claim,  The defendants applied to strike out allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation in su...

By Skyring at the English language Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0,  https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6852664 Jane Lambert Chancery Division (Mr Justice Warby)  HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 273 (Ch) (11 Feb 2021) Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Sussex, brought proceedings against the publisher of The Mail on Sunday and The Mail Online for publishing large parts of a letter that she wrote to her father on 27 Aug 2018.  Her causes of action were breach of statutory duty under the Data Protection Act 2018, misuse of private information and copyright infringement.  I discussed earlier hearings in this litigation in  Practice - Mail's Strikeout Application   on 17 May 2020 and  Confidentiality - Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd   on 13 Aug 2020.  The Application This was an application by the duchess to strike out the publisher's defence to her claims for misuse of private information an...