header-logo header-logo

14 March 2014
Issue: 7598 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Design

Magmatic Ltd v PMS International Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 181, [2014] All ER (D) 12 (Mar)

It was settled law that, before carrying out any comparison of the registered design with an earlier design or with the design of an alleged infringement, it was necessary to ascertain which features were actually protected by the design and so were relevant to the comparison. Further, the two designs had to be considered globally and the informed user would attach less significance to those features which formed part of the design corpus and correspondingly greater significance to those features which did not. The informed user would also attach particular importance to features in respect of which the designer had a great deal of design freedom. The analysis was not limited to those considerations, however, for a global assessment further required the designs to be considered having regard to the way in which the products to which the designs were intended to be applied were used, with some features having greater prominence than others, perhaps because they were more visible.

 

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll