Jonathan Cohen reports on phantom passengers, terminating contracts and trade mark confusion
Returning to their desks after what passed for a British summer, commercial litigators can take some consolation from three recent decisions in which the judiciary have provided us with useful guidance in areas which often prove complex:
● how a contract can be terminated effectively against the backdrop of litigation;
● how a fraudulent claim will impact an otherwise genuine piece of litigation; and
● how to adduce evidence of confusion (or lack of it) when opposing the registration or the continued use of a mark, that is claimed to be similar to a registered trade mark.
The Leofelis litigation
At the outset of his leading judgment in Leofelis SA and Leeside SRL v Lonsdale Sports Ltd, Trade Mark Licensing Co Ltd and Sports World International Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 640, [2008] All ER (D) 87 (Jul) Lord Justice Lloyd commented both on the unusual number of issues in the appeal and noted that whilst it centred on a trade mark licence,
7670829bf5ee4855af368e509c9111b6.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=d9eca78_1)
