header-logo header-logo

23 October 2008
Issue: 7342 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Comparative matters

How much scope do advertisers have to use comparative trademarks? Ask Hamish Porter & Louisa Albertini

Comparative advertising, where goods or services offered by a competitor are identified by reference to a registered trade mark, can cause great concern to trade mark owners as their competitors normally seek to make unfavourable comparisons with their own goods or services, or to take advantage of being associated with the market leader's brand. The UK courts have recently requested guidance from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the extent to which comparative advertising can be used.
Marking one's territory

The Trade Marks Directive (TMD), (First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988, to approximate the laws of the member states relating to trade marks), provides that a trade mark owner is entitled under certain conditions to prevent third parties from using a sign which is identical or similar to his trade mark, including use in advertising. In contrast, the Comparative Advertising Directive—Council Directive 84/450/ EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

Ling Ong, partner at Weightmans and president of London Market FOIL, discusses her biggest inspirations, the challenges of AI and the importance of tackling unconscious bias

DWF—Imogen Francis

DWF—Imogen Francis

Director and head of IP team joins in Birmingham

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Firm boosts partnership and costs practice with five senior promotions

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll