header-logo header-logo

Trade mark

16 November 2012
Issue: 7538 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Hollister Incorporated and another company v Medik Ostomy Supplies Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1419, [2012] All ER (D) 114 (Nov)

Article 13 of Parliament and Council Directive (EC) 2004/48 (on the enforcement of intellectual property rights) did not require a court undertaking an account of the profits made by the infringer to adjust that account by reference to the profits lost by the right holder. It was incumbent on national authorities to adopt appropriate measures to deal with infringements, including infringements resulting from a failure to give notice. Such measures had to be proportionate, and they had to satisfy the principles of equivalence and effectiveness. An account of profits did not compensate the trade mark owner for the losses he had suffered. It simply deprived the infringer of the profits he had made from an activity in which he should never have engaged. Therefore, it ensured the infringer had not benefited from his wrong, but contained no element of punishment. Moreover, as an equitable remedy, it might be refused if, for any reason, it would produce an

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll