header-logo header-logo

Going, going, gone?

10 July 2009 / Jonathan Cohen
Issue: 7377 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Jonathan Cohen unravels some of the complexities of trade mark infringement under European law

The increasing popularity of buying and selling goods through internet auction houses recently posed a fascinating question for the High Court: to what extent can an online auction house be liable for the activities of those who use its services to infringe trade marks?

Mr Justice Arnold heard (1) L’Oréal SA, (2) Lancõme Parfums et Beaute & Cie, Laboratoire Garnier & Cie (4) L’Oreal (UK) Ltd v E Bay International AG & 9 Others [2009] EWHN 1094 (Ch). His extensive analysis of the complexities of trade mark infringement under European law, of the nature of what can constitute accessory liability at common law and of what remedies for any such liabilities could be available in the High Court, provide an extremely helpful insight to practitioners. All the more so because the applications of this judgment will extend beyond the realm of the internet. But even then Arnold J was required to make references to the European court for clarification on four

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll