header-logo header-logo

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

Going, going, gone?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll