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 22,534 results that match your search.22,534 results
  • As investment into Latin America increases, protecting famous trade marks becomes more important. Tony Ferguson compares the protection available in Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil and Chile
  • South Africa A L 1 (2) Spoor & Fisher Pretoria ? ? 2 (1) Adams & Adams Pretoria ? ? 3 (4) DM Kisch Johannesburg ? ? 4 (3) John & Kernick/Bowman Gilfillan Halfway House ? ? 5 (-) Hahn & Hahn Pretoria ? ?
  • Authur Fisher, vice president, IP law, Nortel Networks
  • For two decades, Canada has lagged behind its major trading partners in patenting higher life forms. Steve Garland and Kathy Lipic explain how this situation has changed, following a landmark Federal Court decision
  • Czech Republic A L 1 (1) Patentservis Praha Prague ? ? 2 (-) Traplova Patent and Law Office Prague ? ? 3 (3) Cermak Horejs Vrba Prague ? ? 4 (5=) Rott Ruzicka & Gutman Prague ? ? 5 (2) Kania Sedlak Smola Prague ? ?
  • Since the middle of the 18th century, tequila has been considered a traditional beverage in Mexico, first locally and afterwards obtaining the status of the representative beverage of our country, when in 1873 Cenobio Sauza began the exportation of the product to the United States.
  • Austria A L 1 (2) Dr Thomas M Haffner Vienna ? 2 (3) Patnentwalte Kliment Vienna ? 3 (1) Sonn Pawloy Weinzinger & Wolfram Vienna ? 4 (-) DI Berger Vienna ? 5 (4) Kopecky & Schwarz Vienna ?
  • In an earlier issue of this magazine, we reported on the granting of Supplementary Protection Certificates, SPCs (June 1999, Issue 90, pages 49-50).
  • Africa
  • The Colombian Patent Office denied to grant a patent on an application filed by Pfizer Inc directed to a product known as "Viagra" , whose chemical name is pyrazolepyrimidone. The reason for this decision was that the application was trying to protect a new use of a known product. About the same time, the Peruvian Patent Office granted a patent to a corresponding patent application for the same subject matter.