Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 22,734 results that match your search.22,734 results
  • Aprinciple of patent law is the principle of territoriality. This concerns the limited validity and enforceability of the patent in national territory.
  • On March 8 2018, the European Court of Justice decided on the preliminary questions posed by the Oberlandesgericht in Düsseldorf regarding the appearance of a design determined by technical function ((C-395/16) DOCERAM v CeramTec).
  • In a recent ruling by the Court of The Hague C/09/545302 / KG ZA 17-1636, Pfizer and Ono faced each other over an alleged abuse of German process law by Pfizer.
  • In the case, Crocs Inc USA v Liberty Shoes Limited [CS (COMM) No 772/2016 and connected cases], Crocs (the plaintiff) held design registrations (Nos 197685 and 197686) under the Design Act 2000 (the Act), for its perforated and non-perforated clog-type slipper/shoes. From 2014 to 2018, Crocs filed several suits for infringement of its registered designs, seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants, restraining them from infringing the design of Crocs footwear.
  • Sponsored by Cabinet Beau de Loménie
    Paris will welcome the summer Olympic Games in 2024. This is a huge challenge for the Organising Committee.
  • China is on course to overtake the US in three years as the largest source of applications filed under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty. Trade mark filing under the Madrid System and design filing under the Hague System both increased in 2017
  • Patrick Wingrove rounds up recent intellectual property news, including the introduction of the Marrakesh Treaty and STRONGER Patents Act in US Congress, the Blurred Lines copyright appeal, amendments to Mexico’s IP law, Fujifilm winning at the ITC, and more
  • Generally trade mark use does not raise questions. The law (Article 1484) simply states that the trade mark may be used on goods, in documents, in advertisements and other material. When the issue of non-use is examined by courts, these provisions of the law are compared with what happens on the market. For the purpose of proper use, the law (Article 1486) also states that a trade mark may be used by the trade mark owner himself as well as by other people under the control of the trade mark owner. Control should be understood broadly. This is not only a licence but any transaction or chain of transactions where the trade mark owner is aware of the use by other people and may intervene if necessary. This is a relationship pattern that has been adjusted by judicial practice and proved in many cases.
  • Does a trade mark owner have to be physically present in the Philippines to show genuine use of a mark? In the case of W Land Holdings Inc v Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide Inc (G.R. No. 222366, December 4 2017), the Supreme Court (SC) ruled in favour of Starwood, asserting that it makes actual use of its W mark in the Philippines. This case arose from a cancellation action filed with the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL).
  • Louis Vuitton Malletier, the owner of the LV registered trade mark, recently filed a civil lawsuit with the IP Court against a second-hand luxury goods vendor, accusing the vendor of selling LV branded counterfeits online. In November 2017, the IP Court issued a judgment. The defendant was found guilty of trade mark infringement while Louis Vuitton was awarded compensatory damages.