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 22,305 results that match your search.22,305 results
  • Under Thai practice, an application for a trade mark with multiple meanings may be rejected if one of the possible meanings of the mark could be considered descriptive of the goods for which registration is sought. Contrary to this common practice, however, the following case provides an example of a trade mark application that was initially rejected by the registrar on grounds of descriptiveness, but was subsequently accepted for registration by the Board of Trade Marks.
  • During 2007, the Dubai Court of First Instance was called on to confirm the validity of the trade mark Aqua, used in respect of metal drain covers and the cancellation of the trade mark Aqua M BBM used and registered in respect of identical goods. The court dismissed the action, a decision that was confirmed by both the Courts of Appeal (Number 631/2007) and Cassation (Number 95/2008).
  • The purpose of the Act on the Evaluation of Chemical Substances and the Regulation of Their Manufacture. (Kagakubusshitsu no Shinsa oyobi Seizoto no Kisei nikansuru Horitsu, Law no 117 of 1973, the Chemical Substances Control Law) is to control the manufacture and importation of chemical substances which might affect the natural environment or human health. Under the Chemical Substances Control Law, notifications are required for the manufacture or importation of new chemical substances. However, notifications are not required for the manufacture or importation of existing chemical substances, which are comprised of approximately 20,000 different types of substance and had already existed at the time the Chemical Substances Control Law was established in 1973.
  • A patent confers exclusivity upon the patentee to exploit an invention and to produce, sell or import the patented product or process for a limited period. However, there are some limitations to this exclusive right, such as research exemptions, providing some information to the authorities and the Bolar exception. The Indian Patents Act, 1970 incorporates these exceptions under Sections 47, 100 and 107A.
  • In November 2008 a new government was voted into Parliament in New Zealand. With the new government has come progress on some long-awaited IP legislation.
  • Beijing-based Wangzhihe has won a battle over rights to its trade mark in Germany
  • Managing IP reports on highlights from the sessions, the keynote speeches and the receptions in Seattle last month
  • The doctrine of collateral estoppel can assist parties facing costly litigation. Robert Berezin and Carmen Bremer consider how it can be invoked in patent disputes
  • Questions in a dispute over the sale of counterfeit goods on eBay have been referred to Europe's highest court
  • Australia's highest court recently narrowed the scope of copyright protection for compilations and databases