*Case C-337/95 Parfums Christian Dior SA v Evora BV [1997] ECR I-1603, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I19C708B0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Case C-292/00 Davidoff & Cie SA, Zino Davidoff SA v Gofkid Ltd [2003] ECR I 389, [2002] ETMR 99, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I94E230C0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4JT8-8WR0-TXD8-61KW&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4JT8-8WR0-TXD8-61KW&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990c). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4JT8-8WR0-TXD8-61KW&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990d). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4JT8-8WR0-TXD8-61KW&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Alexandra Sims. (2005). ‘A shift in the centre of gravity’: the dangers of protecting privacy through breach of confidence. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 1, 27–51. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I84951700E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Andreas Rahmatian. (2005). Music and creativity as perceived by copyright law. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 267–293. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/IBD9BC3D0E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Andrew Griffiths. (2001). The impact of the global appreciation approach on the boundaries of trade mark protection. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 326–360. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I80DC7BD0E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Andrew Griffiths. (2007a). The trade mark monopoly: an analysis of the core zone of absolute protection under Art.5(1)(a). Intellectual Property Quarterly, 3, 312–349. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I943CD4A0407811DCBD0B8974948FEEE1&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Andrew Griffiths. (2007b). The trade mark monopoly: an analysis of the core zone of absolute protection under Art.5(1)(a). Intellectual Property Quarterly, 3, 312–349. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I943CD4A0407811DCBD0B8974948FEEE1&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Bainbridge, David I. (2012). Intellectual property (9th ed). Pearson.
Colgate-Palmolive BV v Koninklijke Distilleerderijen Erven Lucas Bols NV (1976) 7 IIC 420 (CLAERYN/KLAREIN), (1979). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I89876421E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009a). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009b). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009c). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009d). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009e). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009f). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009g). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009h). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009i). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009j). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. (2009k). Intellectual property law (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Bergquist, J., & Curley, D. (2008). Shape trade marks and fast-moving consumer goods. European Intellectual Property Review, 17–24. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I4605FB80A38411DCA386F3C91B230F0D/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-48/05 Adam Opel v Autec [2007] ETMR 33. (2007a). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IDB584410131811DCBED6E2488C9C88D7&crumb-action=reset
Case C-48/05 Adam Opel v Autec [2007] ETMR 33. (2007b). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IDB584410131811DCBED6E2488C9C88D7&crumb-action=reset
Case C-59/08 Copad SA v Christian Dior Couture [2009] FSR 859 (22). (2009a). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE642516054A011DE99E188287EC57E09/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-59/08 Copad SA v Christian Dior Couture [2009] FSR 859 (22). (2009b). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE642516054A011DE99E188287EC57E09/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Case C-252/07 Intel Corporation Inc v CPM United Kingdom Ltd [2009] ETMR 13. (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE1F1D190EF4B11DDABD59220C1484B66&crumb-action=reset
*Case C-291/00 LTJ Diffusion v Sadas Vertbaudet, [2003] ECR I-2799, [2003] ETMR 83, (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE810E610E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Case C-291/00 LTJ Diffusion v Sadas Vertbaudet, [2003] ECR I-2799, [2003] ETMR 83, (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE810E610E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay International [2011] RPC 27. (2011a). http://indiancaselaws.wordpress.com/2013/09/14/loreal-sa-v-ebay-international-ag-c-32409/
Case C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay International [2011] RPC 27. (2011b). http://indiancaselaws.wordpress.com/2013/09/14/loreal-sa-v-ebay-international-ag-c-32409/
Case T-387/06 Inter-Ikea Systems BV v OHIM (IDEA/IKEA) [2009] ETMR 17. (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE1F37F40EF4B11DDABD59220C1484B66&crumb-action=reset
Chancery Division. (1985). Lawson v Dundas. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4PN7-RW10-TXX5-50FC&csi=316560&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
*Noah v Shuba [1991] FSR 14, (1991). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I0D783F20E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Waterman (Pete) Ltd v CBS United Kingdom Ltd [1993] EMLR 27, (1993). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I1E2EA890E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
De Maudsley v Palumbo [1996] FSR 447, (1996). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I95BB52B0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Creation Records v News Group Newspapers [1997] EMLR 444, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8FF0A060E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Robin Ray v Classic FM [1998] FSR 622, (1998). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I848D79E0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Hadley v Kemp [1999] EMLR 589, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB88DD011E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Antiquesportfolio.Com Plc v. Rodney Fitch & Company Limited [2001] ECDR 5, (2001). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I5E91C580E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Irvine v Talksport Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 2355, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICAC470E1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Irvine v Talksport Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 2355, (2002). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICAC470E1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Brighton v Jones [2005] FSR 16, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7A77F3F0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Julius Sämann Ltd v Tetrosyl Ltd [2006] EWHC 529, (2006). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID12EBE91E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] RPC 14, (2006). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I114796A0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] RPC 14, (2006). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I114796A0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
RxWorks Ltd v Hunter [2007] EWHC 3061, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I93AF3FC0BDAD11DCAF01C913343759EA&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Glaxo Group Ltd v Dowelhurst Ltd (No 2) [2000] FSR 529, (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAF9E1000E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Christie, Andrew & Gare, Stephen. (2012). Blackstone’s statutes on intellectual property: Vol. Blackstone’s statutes (11th ed). Oxford University Press.
Christophe Geiger. (2007). Trade marks and freedom of expression - the proportionality of criticism. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 38(3), 317–327. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I2BE7DFB030C111DC94868C93E4A893F7/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Christopher Wadlow. (2011). Passing off at the crossroads again: a review article for Hazel Carty, An Analysis of the Economic Torts. European Intellectual Property Review, 33(7), 447–455. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I4CF8A4E0881111E0B370896DBAF0B922&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Claire Howell. (2006). Trade marks: what constitutes ‘genuine use’? Laboratoires Goemar SA v La Mer Technology. European Intellectual Property Review, 28(2), 118–121. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF32C710E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. (1988). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013a). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013b). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013c). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013d). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013e). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013f). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013g). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013h). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013i). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013j). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. (2013k). Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights (8th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Court: Chancery Division. (1961). Bollinger v Costa Brava Wine Co Ltd [1961] RPC 116. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FGP0-TWW4-2113&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Chancery Division. (1969a). *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDF0-TWW4-205K&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Chancery Division. (1969b). *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDF0-TWW4-205K&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Chancery Division. (1969c). *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDF0-TWW4-205K&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Chancery Division. (1969d). Vine Products Ltd v Mackenzie & Co Ltd [1969] RPC 1. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXN-BPC0-TWW4-219M&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Chancery Division. (1974). British Northrop Ltd v Texteam Blackburn Ltd [1974] RPC 57. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDW0-TWW4-20KN&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of Appeal. (1952). Stevenson (or Stephenson) Jordan and Harrison Ltd v MacDonald and Evans (1952) 1 TLR 101. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-YJ40-TWW4-20NH&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of Appeal. (1967a). Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415, [1967] 1 WLR 923. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDF0-TWW4-204J&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of Appeal. (1967b). Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415, [1967] 1 WLR 923. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDF0-TWW4-204J&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of Appeal. (1984). Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik, Budweiser Case [1984] FSR 413. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXV-YY50-TWW4-21H2&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of Appeal. (2007). *L’Oreal SA v Bellure NV [2007] EWCA Civ 968, [2008] RPC 196. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4PWD-GRH0-TWW4-21F9&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: Court of First Instance, EC. (2005). Les Editions Albert Rene v OHIM (Case T-336/03) [2005] ECR II-4667. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4HF5-CB60-TWW4-215W&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: English court pre-dating November 1874. (1849a). Albert (Prince) v Strange (1849) 18 LJ Ch 120, 1 H & Tw 1. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDY0-TWW4-20YP&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: English court pre-dating November 1874. (1849b). Albert (Prince) v Strange (1849) 18 LJ Ch 120, 1 H & Tw 1. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FDY0-TWW4-20YP&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: European Court of Justice. (1999a). Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXR-N2K0-TWW4-2006&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: European Court of Justice. (1999b). Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXR-N2K0-TWW4-2006&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: European Court of Justice. (1999c). Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXR-N2K0-TWW4-2006&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: European Court of Justice. (1999d). Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXR-N2K0-TWW4-2006&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: European Court of Justice. (2003). *Linde AG, Winward Industries Inc & Rado Uhren AG v Deutsches Patentund Markenamt (Cases C-53/01, 54/01 & 55/01) [2003] ECR-I 3161, [2003] RPC 803. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXV-47S0-TWW4-200W&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (1901). IRC v Muller & Co’s Margarine Ltd [1901] AC 217. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXV-M7D0-TWW4-20B3&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (1911). Edge (William) & Sons Ltd v William Niccolls & Sons Ltd [1911] AC 693. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXH-FG30-TWW4-21GN&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (1915). *Spalding (A.G.) & Bros v A.W. Gamage Ltd and Benetfink & Co Ltd (1915) 32 RPC 273 (HL). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXR-6310-TWW4-20NS&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (2004a). *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-JR30-TWW4-21G6&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (2004b). *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-JR30-TWW4-21G6&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Court: House of Lords. (2004c). *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-JR30-TWW4-21G6&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Woodward v Hutchins [1977] 2 All ER 751; [1977] 1 WLR 760, (1977). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I09982950E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Ltd [1982] Ch 119, (1982). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA4F75120E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). (1984). Lion Laboratories Ltd v Evans [1984] 2 All ER 417. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE12C1131E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&crumb-action=reset
*Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] Ch 117, (1987). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA52E8DC1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Kaye v Robertson [1991] FSR 62, (1991). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID1CFE090E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641, (1993). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC7A6E7C0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641, (1993). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC7A6E7C0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641, (1993). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC7A6E7C0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Harrods v Harrodian School [1996] RPC 697, (1996). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IBAF3FAA0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Harrods v Harrodian School [1996] RPC 697, (1996). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IBAF3FAA0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
ZYX Music GmbH v King [1995] 3 All ER 1, [1997] 2 All ER 129, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I124B7CA0E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No 2) [1999] FSR 79, [2000] FSR 363 (CA), (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I108E7FD0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No 2) [1999] FSR 79, [2000] FSR 363 (CA), (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I108E7FD0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No.1) QB 967, [2001] 2 WLR 992, (2001). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9A3457B1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed [2003] ETMR 73 (CA), (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I676D8860E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Beckingham v Hodgens [2003] ECDR 6 (Ch D); [2003] EMLR 18 (CA), (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I72DD8AB0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Reed Executive Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd [2004] ETMR 56, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8510B3A0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2005] 4 All ER 128; [2005] 3 WLR 881, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9A3764F0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Griggs Group Ltd v Evans [2005] FSR 31, (2005). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I2E831BE1E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Sawkins v Hyperion Records [2005] RPC 32; [2005] 1 WLR 3281, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I98427D51E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Sawkins v Hyperion Records [2005] RPC 32; [2005] 1 WLR 3281, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I98427D51E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Baigent & Leigh v Random House [2007] EWCA Civ 247, [2007] FSR 24, (2007). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I372331B0DDA411DB89E08052F2CA7868&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Mastercigars Direct Ltd v Hunters and Frankau [2007] ETMR 54, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I925173E0163D11DCA571A55D57CB3653&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2007] RPC 25, (2007). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0B2036B0D2AC11DB97F6EEA8CBB93415&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2007] RPC 25 (CA), (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0B2036B0D2AC11DB97F6EEA8CBB93415&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward [2008] EWCA Civ 83, [2008] ETMR 36, (2008). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA56805E0E10B11DC9179F6B281EA371D&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
HRH Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2008] Ch 57, [2007] 3 WLR 222, (2008). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA4EFF380924111DB8D3DDAA0606E23F1&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). (2009). *Murray v Express Newspapers Plc [2009] Ch 481. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IF9C8BCC01CBA11DDB566FF76D66A7C56/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Diageo v Intercontinental Brands [2010] ETMR 57, (2010). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IACA34D609C3411DF92A7D3B03F532893&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Hotel Cipriani Srl v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd [2010] RPC 16, (2010). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9139A39021C211DFA41BF0B6F8159676&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Hotel Cipriani Srl v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd [2010] RPC 16, (2010). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9139A39021C211DFA41BF0B6F8159676&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2010] ETMR 47 (Court of Appeal), (2010). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I0CE81031654811DFADCD9988CD311A96/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). (2011). Donald v Ntuli [2011] 1 WLR 294. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IF83A68B0F1E011DF8DDEF4C61C812980/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Eden SARL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) [2006] (T-305/04) ETMR 14, (2006). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9F9A2DB1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
John Haig & Co Ltd v Forth Blending Co Ltd (1953) 70 RPC 259, (1953). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICD7279E0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
David Booton. (2011). The informal acquisition of copyright. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 1, 28–49. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID6711520345311E0BC47AA7F74E9E5E3&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Davis, J. (2005). The Need to Leave Free for Others to Use and the Trade Mark Common. In Trade mark use. Oxford University Press.
Douglas and Zeta Jones v Hello! Ltd [2005] 4 All ER 128. (2005). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4H7S-JMY0-TWP1-605P&csi=274668&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Dowie-Whybrow, M. (2013a). Core statutes on intellectual property: Vol. Palgrave Macmillan core statutes (Fourth edition). Palgrave Macmillan.
Dowie-Whybrow, M. (2013b). Core statutes on intellectual property: Vol. Palgrave Macmillan core statutes (Fourth edition). Palgrave Macmillan.
Dyson Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks (Case C-321/03) - [2007] ETMR 34. (2007a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=55Y7-JST1-DYBP-N4FG&csi=274665&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Dyson Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks (Case C-321/03) - [2007] ETMR 34. (2007b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=55Y7-JST1-DYBP-N4FG&csi=274665&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4K4W-PD40-TXD8-60FB&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4K4W-PD40-TXD8-60FB&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979c). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4K4W-PD40-TXD8-60FB&csi=296986&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Estelle Derclaye. (2010). Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/08): wonderful or worrisome? The impact of the ECJ ruling in Infopaq on UK copyright law. European Intellectual Property Review, 247–251. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IB72704A030AC11DF9C83BB18AACF6BDB/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
European Court of Human Rights. (2004a). *Von Hannover v Germany (59320/00) (2004) 40 EHRR 1. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE52AC120003611DBB3E7976425AFED86/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
European Court of Human Rights. (2004b). *Von Hannover v Germany (59320/00) (2004) 40 EHRR 1. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE52AC120003611DBB3E7976425AFED86/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Mosley v United Kingdom [2012] EMLR 1, (2011). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB01A71007C4711E09FE9952F1280B01E&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Axel Springer v Germany [2012] EMLR 15, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC1FFA770881A11E1B306BD6814F5898C&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Von Hannover v Germany (No 2) [2012] EMLR 16, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0F55C7C0881B11E1B306BD6814F5898C&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case 8/74 Procureur du Roi v Dassonville [1974] ECR 837 at 852, [1974] 2 CMLR 436, (1974). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I2937F9D0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Cases C-15 & 16/74 Centrafarm v Sterling Drug, Centrafarm v Winthrop [1974] ECR 1147, 1183, [1974] 2 CMLR 480, (1974). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I839F8CE0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-317/91 Deutsche Renault AG v Audi AG [1993] ECR I-6227, [1995] 1 CMLR 461, (1995). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I98789DF1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-427/93 Bristol-Myers Squibb v Paranova [1996] ECR I-3457, [1997] 1 CMLR 1151, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7A9F5210E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-427/93 Bristol-Myers Squibb v Paranova [1996] ECR I-3457, [1997] 1 CMLR 1151, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7A9F5210E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1, (1998). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I97093A00E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1, (1998). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I97093A00E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1, (1998). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I97093A00E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-355/96 Silhouette International Schmied GmbH v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH [1998] ECR I-4799, [1998] 2 CMLR 953, (1998). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA8607750E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I82095C80E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I82095C80E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I82095C80E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I82095C80E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I82095C80E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-63/97 BMW v Deenik [1999] ECR I-905, [1999] 1 CMLR 1099, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I708BF991E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions und Vertriebs GmbH v Boots und Segelzubehor Walter Huber (Cases C-108/97 and 109/97) [1999] ECR I-2779, [2000] 2 WLR 205, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I08B1E800E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions und Vertriebs GmbH v Boots und Segelzubehor Walter Huber (Cases C-108/97 and 109/97) [1999] ECR I-2779, [2000] 2 WLR 205, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I08B1E800E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions und Vertriebs GmbH v Boots und Segelzubehor Walter Huber (Cases C-108/97 and 109/97) [1999] ECR I-2779, [2000] 2 WLR 205, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I08B1E800E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-375/97 General Motors v Yplon [2000] RPC 572, (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IADFD5850E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-379/97 Pharmacia & Upjohn SA v Paranova A/S ("Paranova II”)[1999] ECR I-6927, [2000] 1 CMLR 51, (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I1E835840E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Procter & Gamble Company v OHIM (BABY DRY) (Case C-383/99 P) [2001] ECR I-6251, [2002] Ch 82, (2001). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I291D6CF0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-2/00 Hölterhoff v Ulrich Freiesleben [2002] ETMR 917, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC3117690E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-143/00 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer I”) [2002] ECR I-3759, [2002] All ER (EC) 581, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7643E730E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-414/99 Zino Davidoff SA v A&G Imports Ltd [2001] ECR I-8691, [2002] Ch 109, [2002] 1 CMLR 1, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I123387D0E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Case C-414/99 Zino Davidoff SA v A&G Imports Ltd [2001] ECR I-8691, [2002] Ch 109, [2002] 1 CMLR 1, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I123387D0E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Koninklijke Philips v Remington (Case C-299/99) [2002] ECR I-5475, [2002] ETMR 81, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID535C7E0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Koninklijke Philips v Remington (Case C-299/99) [2002] ECR I-5475, [2002] ETMR 81, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID535C7E0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (Case C-299/99) [2002] ECR I-5475, [2002] All ER (EC) 634, [2002] 2 CMLR 1329, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID535C7E0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA8480D50E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37, (2002). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA8480D50E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA8480D50E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-40/01 Ansul BV and Ajax Brandbeveiliging BV (Minimax) [2003] ECR I-2439, [2003] ETMR 85, (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I5E814AC0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-206/01 Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed, [2002] ECR I-10273, [2003] ETMR 19 (ECJ), (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I676B8C90E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*OHIM v Wm Wrigley Junior Co (DOUBLEMINT) (Case C-191/01 P) [2004] RPC 327, [2004] 1 WLR 1728, (2004). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I1233F270E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*OHIM v Wm Wrigley Junior Co (DOUBLEMINT) (Case C-191/01 P) [2004] RPC 327, [2004] 1 WLR 1728, (2004). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I1233F270E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C–16/03 Peak Holding v Axolin-Elinor [2004] ECR I–11313, [2005] Ch 261, [2005] 2 WLR 650, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I1AF74B50E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Case C-173/98 Sebago Inc and Ancienne Maison Dubois v GB Unic SA [1999] ETMR 681, (1999). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9F7990E1E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-100/02 Gerolsteiner & Brunnen GmbH & Co. v Putsch GmbH [2004] ETMR 40, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAE5EB230E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-100/02 Gerolsteiner & Brunnen GmbH & Co. v Putsch GmbH [2004] ETMR 40, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAE5EB230E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-533/06 O2 Holdings Ltd v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd [2008] ETMR 55, (2008). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I341987E03CF711DDA8E4E8EFC9CB01FD&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8F8A7AF0652B11DE983DB30BB4733E30&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8F8A7AF0652B11DE983DB30BB4733E30&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8F8A7AF0652B11DE983DB30BB4733E30&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-323/09 Interflora v Marks & Spencer plc [2012] ETMR 1, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAF651490EAF111E0A275A3ECCA23837C&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-323/09 Interflora v Marks & Spencer plc [2012] ETMR 1, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAF651490EAF111E0A275A3ECCA23837C&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9A9597108F5111DC9C26E9F078BBCACB&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9A9597108F5111DC9C26E9F078BBCACB&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9A9597108F5111DC9C26E9F078BBCACB&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Lego Juris v OHIM (Case C-48/09 P) [2010] ETMR 63, (2010). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IACB54990F69B11DFB99CA99461512FB4&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-324/09 L’Oreal SA v eBay International AG [2011] ETMR 53, (2011). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7F3F9920B27F11E0818793785D117705&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I980E9C10E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I980E9C10E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I980E9C10E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I980E9C10E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID3E9D8F035AB11DCB9EEC1DD635D0C90&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID3E9D8F035AB11DCB9EEC1DD635D0C90&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID3E9D8F035AB11DCB9EEC1DD635D0C90&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID3E9D8F035AB11DCB9EEC1DD635D0C90&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID3E9D8F035AB11DCB9EEC1DD635D0C90&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-408/01 Adidas-Salomon AG & Adidas Benelux BV v Fitnessworld Trading Ltd [2004] ETMR 10, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I5343F131E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-408/01 Adidas-Salomon AG & Adidas Benelux BV v Fitnessworld Trading Ltd [2004] ETMR 10, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I5343F131E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Procter & Gamble v OHIM (Cases C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P) [2004] ETMR 89, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I291ECC80E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist H.O.D.N. Memex (Case C-283/01) [2004] ETMR 33, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IA7E1AA60E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-259/02 La Mer Technology Inc v Laboratoires Goemar SA [2004] ETMR 47, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID645B140E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case 228/03 Gillette Company v LA-Laboratories Ltd Case [2005] ETMR 67, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAEF59B00E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case 228/03 Gillette Company v LA-Laboratories Ltd Case [2005] ETMR 67, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAEF59B00E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Case C-246/05 Armin Häupl v Lidl Stiftung & Co KG [2007] ETMR 61, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I853010504BAC11DC869CF358B7B5BFD4&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, [2012] ECDR 6, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB8007600633511E19B1EDECF6B79D5EA&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, [2012] ECDR 6, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB8007600633511E19B1EDECF6B79D5EA&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Express Newspapers plc v News (UK) Ltd and others - [1990] 3 All ER 376. (1990a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4CSP-49F0-TWP1-6012&csi=274668&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Express Newspapers plc v News (UK) Ltd and others - [1990] 3 All ER 376. (1990b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4CSP-49F0-TWP1-6012&csi=274668&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Fhima, I. S. (2011). The Court of Justice’s protection of the advertising function of trade marks: an (almost) sceptical analysis. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 6(5), 325–329. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpr004
Fysh, Michael, Roughton, Ashley, Johnson, Phillip, & Cook, Trevor M. (2010). The modern law of patents (2nd ed). LexisNexis.
Gangjee, D., & Burrell, R. (n.d.). Because You’re Worth It: L’Oreal and the Prohibition on Free Riding. Modern Law Review, 73(2), 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2010.00794.x
Garnett, K. M., Davies, Gillian, Harbottle, Gwilym, Copinger, Walter Arthur, & Skone James, E. P. (2011). Copinger and Skone James on copyright: Vol. Intellectual property library (16th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Gavin Phillipson. (2003). Transforming breach of confidence? Towards a common law right of privacy under the Human Rights Act. Modern Law Review, 66(5), 726–758. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAB06B7B0E71311DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Gill Grassie. (2006a). Parallel imports and trade marks - where are we? Part 1. European Intellectual Property Review, 28(9), 474–479. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I8FFA6D10298311DB9C38979DE63AE30C&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Gill Grassie. (2006b). Parallel imports and trade marks: Part 2: the repackaging cases. European Intellectual Property Review, 28(10), 513–516. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB3C89E9042A811DBBF32AB60305756BD&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Google France SARL and another v Louis Vuitton Malletier SA Google France SARL v Viaticum SA and another Google France SARL v Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL and others - [2010] All ER (D) 23 (Apr). (2010a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7Y4Y-47W0-Y96Y-H1TV&csi=274665&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Google France SARL and another v Louis Vuitton Malletier SA Google France SARL v Viaticum SA and another Google France SARL v Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL and others - [2010] All ER (D) 23 (Apr). (2010b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7Y4Y-47W0-Y96Y-H1TV&csi=274665&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Arsenal v Reed [2003] RPC 39, (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I676D8860E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Helberger, N., Dufft, N., Van Gompel, S., & Bernt Hugenholtz, P. (2008). Never forever: why extending the term of protection for sound recordings is a bad idea. European Intellectual Property Review, 30(5), 174–181. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IBD3B9C10003511DDA46EB425E5C11227&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Helen Norman. (2004a). Time to blow the whistle on trade mark use? Intellectual Property Quarterly, 1–34. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I80E07370E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Helen Norman. (2004b). Time to blow the whistle on trade mark use? Intellectual Property Quarterly, 1–34. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I80E07370E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Honestly, neither Celine nor Gillette is defensible! (2008). European Intellectual Property Review, 30(7), 286–293. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I734626B0286811DD8EF9F64D79DCEEA7&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Reddaway v Banham [1896] AC 199, (1896). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I84E3FE50E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273, (1964). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID65CE2C1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273, (1964). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID65CE2C1E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
George Hensher Ltd v Restawile Upholstery (Lancs) Ltd [1976] AC 64, (1976). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAE3160A0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Reckitt & Colman v Borden [1990] RPC 341; [1990] 1 WLR 491, (1990). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I84D5CD80E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Reckitt & Colman v Borden [1990] RPC 341; [1990] 1 WLR 491, (1990). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I84D5CD80E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Newspaper Licensing Agency v Marks & Spencer Plc [2001] Ch 257 (CA); [2003] 1 AC 551 (HL), (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0CD54860E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Wainwright v Home Office (AC 406), (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IEF2EAFD0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*R v Johnstone [2004] ETMR 2, (2004). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I50612720E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) [2005] 1 AC 593, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I915A7420E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, HL, (2008). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I35E233B0F92311DB9045877B5F5EF663&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Fisher v Brooker [2007] EMLR 9; [2007] FSR 12 (Ch D); [2008] EMLR 13 (CA); [2009] 1 WLR 1764 (HL), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IC84829907D7D11DE8013EC861A6B9FF1&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Ilanah Simon. (2005). How does ‘essential function’ doctrine drive European mark trade law? International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 401–420. http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I2F701380E71311DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Ilanah Simon. (2007). Nominative use and honest practices in industrial and commercial matters - a very European history. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 117–147. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/I7237CE70FF5311DB890AD2939FCE442A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Infopaq International v Danske Dagblades Forening (Case C-5/08), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IEE144860B3B611DE8E61D7238152E802/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Intellectual Property Office. (1994a). Trade Marks Act 1994. http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-tm/t-law.htm
Intellectual Property Office. (1994b). Trade Marks Act 1994. http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-tm/t-law.htm
Intellectual Property Office. (1994c). Trade Marks Act 1994. http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-tm/t-law.htm
Irini A. Stamatoudi. (2000). ‘Joy’ for the claimant: can a film also be protected as a dramatic work? Intellectual Property Quarterly, 117–126. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I7FA49810E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Jacob, Robin, Alexander, Daniel, & Fisher, Matthew. (2013a). Guidebook to intellectual property (6th ed). Hart.
Jacob, Robin, Alexander, Daniel, & Fisher, Matthew. (2013b). Guidebook to intellectual property (6th ed). Hart.
Jennifer Davis. (2010). Why the United Kingdom should have a law against misappropriation. Cambridge Law Journal, 69(3), 561–581. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE598DCA20CB111E0AFBDF1383E1E3727&crumb-action=reset
Jeremy Phillips. (2005). Trade mark law and the need to keep free. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 36(4), 389–401. http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I2F74CE71E71311DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Jochen Pagenberg. (2004). Trade dress and the three dimensional mark - the neglected children of trade mark law? International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 35(7), 831–843. http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I2F83C290E71311DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Joshi, R., & Isaac, B. (2005). What does identical mean? European Intellectual Property Review, 27(5), 184–187. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF4A94D0E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Keeling, David T. (2003). Intellectual property rights in EU law: Vol. 1: Free movement and competition law: Vol. Oxford EC law library. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198259183.001.0001
Kitchin, David, Kerly, Duncan Mackenzie, & Jacob, Robin. (2005). Kerly’s law of trade marks and trade names: Vol. Intellectual property library (14th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (Case C-299/99) - [2003] Ch 159. (2002). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/results/enhdocview.do?docLinkInd=true&ersKey=23_T19962953981&format=GNBFULL&startDocNo=0&resultsUrlKey=0_T19962953983&backKey=20_T19962953984&csi=296988&docNo=10&scrollToPosition=1710
Laddie, Hugh. (2000). The modern law of copyright and designs. Butterworths.
Laddie, Justice. (1996). Copyright: over-strength, over-regulated, over-rated? European Intellectual Property Review, 18(5), 253–260. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID04F5AA0E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Liakatou, V., & Maniatis, S. (2010). Lego - building a European concept of functionality. European Intellectual Property Review, 32(12), 653–656. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IB6FD09E1EED711DFB0EED922B45E4A88&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) - [2004] Ch 83. (2004a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/results/enhdocview.do?docLinkInd=true&ersKey=23_T19962934462&format=GNBFULL&startDocNo=0&resultsUrlKey=0_T19962934467&backKey=20_T19962934468&csi=296988&docNo=2&scrollToPosition=114
*Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) - [2004] Ch 83. (2004b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/results/enhdocview.do?docLinkInd=true&ersKey=23_T19962934462&format=GNBFULL&startDocNo=0&resultsUrlKey=0_T19962934467&backKey=20_T19962934468&csi=296988&docNo=2&scrollToPosition=114
*Libertel v Benelux Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) [2003] ECR I-3793 [2003] ETMR 63. (2003). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE0B97940E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&crumb-action=reset
M. Senftlebel. (2011). Bringing EU Trademark Law Back Into Shape – Lessons to Learn from Keyword Advertising (Brussels, Belgium). 6th Annual Conference of the EPIP Association: Fine-Tuning IPR Debates (8 September 2011). http://www.epip.eu/conferences/epip06/papers/Parallel%20Session%20Papers/
Marca Mode CV v Adidas AG and Adidas Benelux (Case C-425/98 ), (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IEE0DCBF0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Merchandising Corporation of America v Harpbond [1983] FSR 32. (1983). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IF91A2A70E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Merz & Krell (Case C-517/99) [2001] ECR I-6959. (2001). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IF9600D10E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&crumb-action=reset
Metix (UK) Ltd v G.H. Maughan (Plastics) Ltd [1997] FSR 718, (1997). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IF98129A0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Module Outline & Reading for TERM 1. (n.d.).
Morcom, Christopher. (2005). The modern law of trade marks (2nd ed). LexisNexis Butterworths.
Mothercare v Penguin Books [1988] R.P.C. 113. (1988). http://rpc.oxfordjournals.org/content/105/6/113.short?rss=1&ssource=mfr
N.A. Moreham. (2005). Privacy in the common law: a doctrinal and theoretical analysis. Law Quarterly Review, 121(Oct), 628–656. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICC8D72D0E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Meltwater Holding BV [2012] RPC 1. (2012a). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE9F6C360B8A611E08E89E51884D3FC3D&crumb-action=reset
*Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Meltwater Holding BV [2012] RPC 1. (2012b). http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IE9F6C360B8A611E08E89E51884D3FC3D&crumb-action=reset
Nigel P. Gravells. (2007). Authorship and originality: the persistent influence of Walter v Lane. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 3, 267–293. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I9439A050407811DCBD0B8974948FEEE1&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Zanella SNC’s Community Trade Mark Application (B.42053) [2000] ETMR 69, (2000). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I120C29B0E42911DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
*Temple Island Collections Ltd v New English Teas Ltd [2012] FSR 9, (2012). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID00513403D7F11E18561D2A3A042DC41&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Redd Solicitors LLP v Red Legal Ltd [2012] EWPCC 54, [2013] ETMR 13, (2013). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I4ADB2B204A5111E2AFC5ADE6B0249198&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Patricia Loughlan. (2005). Descriptive trade marks, fair use and consumer confusion. European Intellectual Property Review, 27(12), 443–445. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF386C60E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Phillips, J. (n.d.). Strong trade marks and the likelihood of confusion in European law. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1(6), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpl038
Phillips, Jeremy. (2003a). Trade mark law: a practical anatomy. Oxford University Press.
Phillips, Jeremy. (2003b). Trade mark law: a practical anatomy. Oxford University Press.
Pila, J. (n.d.). Copyright and Its Categories of Original Works. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 30(2), 229–254. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqq009
Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd [1981] 1 WLR 193 (PC), (1981). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I806103B0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc [1989] AC 217, (1989). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICA553451E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EMLR 20, (2008). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID55150E05EC411DDAB7DC9767090C799&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB), [2008] EMLR 20, (2008). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ID55150E05EC411DDAB7DC9767090C799&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Queen’s Bench Division. (2012). *Spelman v Express Newspapers [2012] EWHC 355. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0CBAF4D06D9111E1945FEE25069F94B3&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Rachael Mulheron. (2006). A potential framework for privacy? A reply to Hello! Modern Law Review, 69(5), 679–713. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I2211DAB03F8411DBBD6EEC2A69B1B2FF/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Rebecca Baines. (2005). Copyright in commissioned works: a cause for uncertainty. European Intellectual Property Review, 27(3), 122–123. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF37D020E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Richard Arnold. (2001). Joy: a reply. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 10–21. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I7FA50D40E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Richard Arnold. (2005). Copyright in photographs: a case for reform. European Intellectual Property Review, 27(9), 303–305. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF37F730E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Richard Arnold. (2007). Confidence in exclusives: Douglas v Hello! in the House of Lords. European Intellectual Property Review, 29(8), 339–343. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I5257ADB12B5311DCA0A5F0FD76367280&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Ricketson, S. (1984). Reaping without sowing: Unfair Competition and Intellectual Property Rights in Anglo-Australian Law. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 7(1). http://www.heinonline.org/HOL/Index?index=journals%2Fswales&collection=journals
Roughton, A. (2005). Permitted Infringing Use: the Scope of Defences to an Infringement Action. In Trade mark use. Oxford University Press.
Schechter, F. (1927). The Rational Basis of Trade Mark Protection. Harvard Law Review, 40. http://www.heinonline.org/HOL/Index?index=journals%2Fhlr&collection=journals
Silberquelle GmbH v Maselli-Strickmode GmbH (C-495/07), (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IED6BA7D01B5111DEAFD6ED60DC0DB1FC/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Silver, I., & Lee, P. (2007). Protecting your Rights – Copyright in Computer Games: Nova Productions and Mazooma Games Ltd. European Intellectual Property Review, 29(6), 251–255.
Spence, M. (2002). Justifying Copyright. In Dear images: art, copyright and culture (pp. 389–403). Ridinghouse:, ICA.
Spence, Michael. (2007a). Intellectual property: Vol. Clarendon law series. Oxford University Press.
Spence, Michael. (2007b). Intellectual property: Vol. Clarendon law series. Oxford University Press.
Stothers, Christopher. (2007). Parallel trade in Europe: intellectual property, competition and regulatory law. Hart.
*Lucasfilms v Ainsworth [2009] FSR 2, (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0C305000B84211E09CEF84D8174DB20E&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
*Lucasfilms v Ainsworth [2009] FSR 2, (2009). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I0C305000B84211E09CEF84D8174DB20E&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Tania S.L. Cheng. (2006). Does copyright law confer a monopoly over unpreserved cows? European Intellectual Property Review, 276–281. https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=ICF290310E71211DA915EF37CAC72F838&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Tanya Aplin. (2007). The development of the action for breach of confidence in a post-HRA era. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 19. http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I22D01BE0A82211DB895EE0FA6D085F91&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Terrell, Thomas & Thorley, Simon. (2006). Terrell on the law of patents (16th ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Torremans, Paul & Holyoak, Jon. (2013). Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law (7th ed). Oxford University Press.
Trade Marks Directive 2008. (2008a). http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=5206
Trade Marks Directive 2008. (2008b). http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=5206
Re Ghazilian’s Trade Mark Application [2002] RPC 33, (2002). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAE7CC180E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Re Basic Trademark SA’s Trade Mark Application [2005] RPC 25, (2005). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I701AE840E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
Dennis Woodman v French Connection [2007] RPC 1, (2007). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IAC0ACD2032B511DB8591EC6659BE7CBE&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916a). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE619B480E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916b). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE619B480E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916c). https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IE619B480E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
Wadlow, Christopher. (2004). The law of passing-off: unfair competition by misrepresentation: Vol. Intellectual property library (3rd ed). Sweet & Maxwell.
Waelde, Charlotte. (2014). Contemporary intellectual property: law and policy (3rd ed). Oxford University Press.
Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539. (1900a). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-YK00-TWW4-2116&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539. (1900b). http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FXM-YK00-TWW4-2116&csi=279841&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
Zemer, L. (n.d.). Contribution and collaboration in joint authorship: too many misconceptions. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1(4), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpl005