Search results for

The recent decision of the Kenyan High Court in Weetabix Limited v Manji Food Industries Ltd is noteworthy. First, trade mark judgments are rare in Kenya. Second, because it deals with a range of issues – likelihood of confusion, a family of marks, well-known marks and passing off. Third, because the Court managed to reach a decision which, although not unreasonable, may seem a bit odd to some.

In our articles of July 2014 and February 2015, we reported on a growing conflict within the EPO concerning the independence of the EPO Boards of Appeal. Although we hoped that these issues would soon be resolved, it appears that the conflict between the EPO Boards of Appeal and the EPO management is continuing.

The Indonesian Trade Mark Law No 15/2001 regulates that an owner of an unregistered mark may file a lawsuit for cancellation against a registered mark at the Commercial Court after filing a registration at the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights (DGIPR).

The Malaysian High Court recently decided in the case of Syarikat Duasama Sdn Bhd v Chevron Malaysia Limited that the concept of landlord liability may not be recognised to confer liability on owners of premises where infringing activities are said to have taken place.

On January 20 2015, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and Cambodia's Ministry of Industry and Handicraft (MIH). Under the terms of the agreement, applicants can soon enjoy ease of application for patents and industrial designs in Cambodia and Singapore by filing in either country.

Vietnam's IP Law is fairly liberal on the rights to register marks. Under the law, any organisation or individual has the right to register marks to be used for goods they produce or services they provide. In practice, except for collective marks or certification marks, which are strictly regulated, anyone (legal entities or individuals) can apply for a trade mark or a service mark for any kind of goods or services, as the trade mark office does not request any documents showing their legal status or intent to use at the time of filing. While this helps to simplify the process for trade mark registration, the ease of filing marks also results in trade mark squatting.

Life science companies face unique patent issues, for example concerning relief, exemptions and supplementary protection. Bert Oosting, Andreas von Falck, Stanislas Roux-Vaillard, Stephen Bennett and Daniel Brook examine how these questions will be addressed in the proposed UPC

The Swiss Federal Patent Court recently had the opportunity to give additional thoughts to the question of good faith of a patent infringer. The Swiss Civil Code states that the presumption of acting in good faith cannot be invoked if a person has failed to exercise the diligence required by the circumstances.

The basis of this case (OGH 4 Ob 98/14m "Feeling") was that as a defence against the assertion of an infringement of the Community trade mark Feeling in Austria, a counter-action for revocation because of non-use and for invalidity because of a bad faith application was lodged. But before that an action for invalidity has been filed before OHIM by a third party on the basis of earlier national rights.

The gaming company’s IP lawyer Renee Lawson tells Emma Barraclough about the move from partner to start-up, why the company listens to its lawyers, and the ups and downs of cross-border litigation