header-logo header-logo

11 September 2009 / Jane Foulser McFarlane
Issue: 7384 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

For richer for poorer?

To what extent are intellectual property rights matrimonial assets? asks Jane Foulser McFarlane

The Sunday Times (2 August 2009) reported that ex-Genesis guitarist, Steve Hackett and his wife Kim Poor, who divorced last year, after a 32-year marriage, were embarking on litigation in the High Court, to determine whether Ms Poor, an artist and jewellery designer, was entitled to revenue from Mr Hackett’s intellectual property rights, in respect of classic 1970’s Genesis songs, which he wrote, co-wrote and performed.

Mr Hackett, who had been a lead guitarist with Genesis, until he left the band in the mid 1970s to embark on a solo career, formed a company known as Stephen Hackett Limited, with a view to his future intellectual property rights and royalties, being assigned to that company. Ms Poor is alleging that she is a joint owner of the company, and is entitled to a share of his rights and royalties. However, it appears that Mr Hackett had arranged for all royalties to be paid directly to him as opposed to the

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