header-logo header-logo

01 July 2010 / Louisa Albertini
Issue: 7424 / Categories: Intellectual property , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Handle with care

Louisa Albertini highlights the importance of a clearly drafted trade mark coexistence agreement

A recent High Court case has confirmed that English courts will enforce trade mark coexistence agreements and allow trade marks to be registered which might impinge upon earlier rights where consent to the registration has been given.

This case (Omega Engineering Incorporated v Omega SA [2010] EWHC 1211 (Ch), 28 May 2010) demonstrates the importance of careful drafting of coexistence agreements to ensure that they clearly set out the ambit of parties’ trade mark rights.

OMEGA—the background facts

Omega SA (Swiss) is a watchmaker that was founded in 1848. An American company, Omega Engineering Inc (Engineering) was founded in 1962 and manufactures and markets products for the measurement and control of certain elements including temperature and humidity.

There has been a long-running dispute between the parties over the use of the OMEGA and ? marks. Although their businesses are quite different, their products bear some similarities. In an attempt to avoid potential confusion, the parties have entered into a number

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll