1.
Module Outline & Reading for TERM 1.
2.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
3.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
4.
Christie, Andrew & Gare, Stephen. Blackstone’s statutes on intellectual property. vol. Blackstone’s statutes (Oxford University Press, 2012).
5.
Dowie-Whybrow, M. Core statutes on intellectual property. vol. Palgrave Macmillan core statutes (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013).
6.
Jacob, Robin, Alexander, Daniel, & Fisher, Matthew. Guidebook to intellectual property. (Hart, 2013).
7.
Spence, Michael. Intellectual property. vol. Clarendon law series (Oxford University Press, 2007).
8.
Waelde, Charlotte. Contemporary intellectual property: law and policy. (Oxford University Press, 2014).
9.
Bainbridge, David I. Intellectual property. (Pearson, 2012).
10.
Torremans, Paul & Holyoak, Jon. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2013).
11.
Terrell, Thomas & Thorley, Simon. Terrell on the law of patents. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2006).
12.
Fysh, Michael, Roughton, Ashley, Johnson, Phillip, & Cook, Trevor M. The modern law of patents. (LexisNexis, 2010).
13.
Kitchin, David, Kerly, Duncan Mackenzie, & Jacob, Robin. Kerly’s law of trade marks and trade names. vol. Intellectual property library (Sweet & Maxwell, 2005).
14.
Morcom, Christopher. The modern law of trade marks. (LexisNexis Butterworths, 2005).
15.
Garnett, K. M., Davies, Gillian, Harbottle, Gwilym, Copinger, Walter Arthur, & Skone James, E. P. Copinger and Skone James on copyright. vol. Intellectual property library (Sweet & Maxwell, 2011).
16.
Laddie, Hugh. The modern law of copyright and designs. (Butterworths, 2000).
17.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
18.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
19.
Jacob, Robin, Alexander, Daniel, & Fisher, Matthew. Guidebook to intellectual property. (Hart, 2013).
20.
Spence, Michael. Intellectual property. vol. Clarendon law series (Oxford University Press, 2007).
21.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
22.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
23.
Richard Arnold. Confidence in exclusives: Douglas v Hello! in the House of Lords. European Intellectual Property Review 29, 339–343 (2007).
24.
Tanya Aplin. The development of the action for breach of confidence in a post-HRA era. Intellectual Property Quarterly 19, (2007).
25.
Gavin Phillipson. Transforming breach of confidence? Towards a common law right of privacy under the Human Rights Act. Modern Law Review 66, 726–758 (2003).
26.
Rachael Mulheron. A potential framework for privacy? A reply to Hello! Modern Law Review 69, 679–713 (2006).
27.
Alexandra Sims. ‘A shift in the centre of gravity’: the dangers of protecting privacy through breach of confidence. Intellectual Property Quarterly 1, 27–51 (2005).
28.
N.A. Moreham. Privacy in the common law: a doctrinal and theoretical analysis. Law Quarterly Review 121, 628–656 (2005).
29.
Court: English court pre-dating November 1874. Albert (Prince) v Strange (1849) 18 LJ Ch 120, 1 H & Tw 1. (1849).
30.
Court: Court of Appeal. Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415, [1967] 1 WLR 923. (1967).
31.
Court: House of Lords. *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. (2004).
32.
Court: Chancery Division. *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. (1969).
33.
Court: Court of Appeal. Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415, [1967] 1 WLR 923. (1967).
34.
Court: Chancery Division. *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. (1969).
35.
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990).
36.
Queen’s Bench Division. Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EMLR 20. (2008).
37.
Chancery Division. De Maudsley v Palumbo [1996] FSR 447. (1996).
38.
Court: English court pre-dating November 1874. Albert (Prince) v Strange (1849) 18 LJ Ch 120, 1 H & Tw 1. (1849).
39.
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990).
40.
Court: Chancery Division. *Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415, [1969] RPC 41. (1969).
41.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] Ch 117. (1987).
42.
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990).
43.
AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] AC 109. (1990).
44.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Woodward v Hutchins [1977] 2 All ER 751; [1977] 1 WLR 760. (1977).
45.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2005] 4 All ER 128; [2005] 3 WLR 881. (2005).
46.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Lion Laboratories Ltd v Evans [1984] 2 All ER 417. (1984).
47.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Kaye v Robertson [1991] FSR 62. (1991).
48.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No.1) QB 967, [2001] 2 WLR 992. (2001).
49.
House of Lords. OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, HL. (2008).
50.
House of Lords. Wainwright v Home Office (AC 406). (2003).
51.
European Court of Human Rights. *Von Hannover v Germany (59320/00) (2004) 40 EHRR 1. (2004).
52.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). HRH Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2008] Ch 57, [2007] 3 WLR 222. (2008).
53.
Court: House of Lords. *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. (2004).
54.
House of Lords. S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) [2005] 1 AC 593. (2005).
55.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Murray v Express Newspapers Plc [2009] Ch 481. (2009).
56.
Queen’s Bench Division. *Spelman v Express Newspapers [2012] EWHC 355. (2012).
57.
European Court of Human Rights. *Von Hannover v Germany (59320/00) (2004) 40 EHRR 1. (2004).
58.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Donald v Ntuli [2011] 1 WLR 294. (2011).
59.
European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber). Axel Springer v Germany [2012] EMLR 15. (2012).
60.
European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber). Von Hannover v Germany (No 2) [2012] EMLR 16. (2012).
61.
Queen’s Bench Division. *Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB), [2008] EMLR 20. (2008).
62.
European Court of Human Rights. Mosley v United Kingdom [2012] EMLR 1. (2011).
63.
Court: House of Lords. *Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UK HL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457. (2004).
64.
Douglas and Zeta Jones v Hello! Ltd [2005] 4 All ER 128. (2005).
65.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
66.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
67.
Wadlow, Christopher. The law of passing-off: unfair competition by misrepresentation. vol. Intellectual property library (Sweet & Maxwell, 2004).
68.
Ricketson, S. Reaping without sowing: Unfair Competition and Intellectual Property Rights in Anglo-Australian Law. University of New South Wales Law Journal 7, (1984).
69.
Jennifer Davis. Why the United Kingdom should have a law against misappropriation. Cambridge Law Journal 69, 561–581 (2010).
70.
Christopher Wadlow. Passing off at the crossroads again: a review article for Hazel Carty, An Analysis of the Economic Torts. European Intellectual Property Review 33, 447–455 (2011).
71.
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979).
72.
House of Lords. *Reckitt & Colman v Borden [1990] RPC 341; [1990] 1 WLR 491. (1990).
73.
Court: House of Lords. IRC v Muller & Co’s Margarine Ltd [1901] AC 217. (1901).
74.
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979).
75.
House of Lords. *Reddaway v Banham [1896] AC 199. (1896).
76.
Court: House of Lords. Edge (William) & Sons Ltd v William Niccolls & Sons Ltd [1911] AC 693. (1911).
77.
Court of Session (Outer House). John Haig & Co Ltd v Forth Blending Co Ltd (1953) 70 RPC 259. (1953).
78.
House of Lords. *Reckitt & Colman v Borden [1990] RPC 341; [1990] 1 WLR 491. (1990).
79.
Privy Council. Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd [1981] 1 WLR 193 (PC). (1981).
80.
Court: Chancery Division. Bollinger v Costa Brava Wine Co Ltd [1961] RPC 116. (1961).
81.
Court: Chancery Division. Vine Products Ltd v Mackenzie & Co Ltd [1969] RPC 1. (1969).
82.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Diageo v Intercontinental Brands [2010] ETMR 57. (2010).
83.
Court: Court of Appeal. Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik, Budweiser Case [1984] FSR 413. (1984).
84.
Chancery Division. Waterman (Pete) Ltd v CBS United Kingdom Ltd [1993] EMLR 27. (1993).
85.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Hotel Cipriani Srl v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd [2010] RPC 16. (2010).
86.
Court: House of Lords. *Spalding (A.G.) & Bros v A.W. Gamage Ltd and Benetfink & Co Ltd (1915) 32 RPC 273 (HL). (1915).
87.
Chancery Division. *Irvine v Talksport Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 2355. (2002).
88.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641. (1993).
89.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Harrods v Harrodian School [1996] RPC 697. (1996).
90.
H1 Appeal from the High Court (Chancery Division). Arsenal v Reed [2003] RPC 39. (2003).
91.
Court: Court of Appeal. *L’Oreal SA v Bellure NV [2007] EWCA Civ 968, [2008] RPC 196. (2007).
92.
*Erven Warnink vs Townend [1979] A.C. 731. (1979).
93.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641. (1993).
94.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Taittinger SA v Allbev Ltd [1993] FSR 641. (1993).
95.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Harrods v Harrodian School [1996] RPC 697. (1996).
96.
Chancery Division. *Irvine v Talksport Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 2355. (2002).
97.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
98.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
99.
Jochen Pagenberg. Trade dress and the three dimensional mark - the neglected children of trade mark law? International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 35, 831–843 (2004).
100.
Bergquist, J. & Curley, D. Shape trade marks and fast-moving consumer goods. European Intellectual Property Review 17–24 (2008).
101.
Liakatou, V. & Maniatis, S. Lego - building a European concept of functionality. European Intellectual Property Review 32, 653–656 (2010).
102.
Jeremy Phillips. Trade mark law and the need to keep free. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 36, 389–401 (2005).
103.
Davis, J. The Need to Leave Free for Others to Use and the Trade Mark Common. in Trade mark use (Oxford University Press, 2005).
104.
Patricia Loughlan. Descriptive trade marks, fair use and consumer confusion. European Intellectual Property Review 27, 443–445 (2005).
105.
Intellectual Property Office. Trade Marks Act 1994. (1994).
106.
Trade Marks Directive 2008. (2008).
107.
Court: European Court of Justice. Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. (1999).
108.
Intellectual Property Office. Trade Marks Act 1994. (1994).
109.
Trade Marks Directive 2008. (2008).
110.
European Court of Justice. *Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37. (2002).
111.
Dyson Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks (Case C-321/03) - [2007] ETMR 34. (2007).
112.
European Court of Justice. *Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37. (2002).
113.
European Court of Justice. *Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (C-273/00) [2002] ECR I-11737; [2003] ETMR 37. (2002).
114.
Court of First Instance. Eden SARL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) [2006] (T-305/04) ETMR 14. (2006).
115.
European Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber). Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist H.O.D.N. Memex (Case C-283/01) [2004] ETMR 33. (2004).
116.
*Libertel v Benelux Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) [2003] ECR I-3793 [2003] ETMR 63. (2003).
117.
European Court of Justice. *Koninklijke Philips v Remington (Case C-299/99) [2002] ECR I-5475, [2002] ETMR 81. (2002).
118.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546. (2005).
119.
*Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) - [2004] Ch 83. (2004).
120.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546. (2005).
121.
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (Case C-299/99) - [2003] Ch 159. (2002).
122.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546. (2005).
123.
*Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (Case C-104/01) - [2004] Ch 83. (2004).
124.
European Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber). Procter & Gamble v OHIM (Cases C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P) [2004] ETMR 89. (2004).
125.
Court: European Court of Justice. *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. (2003).
126.
European Court of Justice. *OHIM v Wm Wrigley Junior Co (DOUBLEMINT) (Case C-191/01 P) [2004] RPC 327, [2004] 1 WLR 1728. (2004).
127.
European Court of Justice. 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).
128.
European Court of Justice. 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).
129.
European Court of Justice. Procter & Gamble Company v OHIM (BABY DRY) (Case C-383/99 P) [2001] ECR I-6251, [2002] Ch 82. (2001).
130.
European Court of Justice. *OHIM v Wm Wrigley Junior Co (DOUBLEMINT) (Case C-191/01 P) [2004] RPC 327, [2004] 1 WLR 1728. (2004).
131.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v OHIM (Case C-329/02) (SAT.2), [2005] 1 CMLR 1546. (2005).
132.
Merz & Krell (Case C-517/99) [2001] ECR I-6959. (2001).
133.
European Court of Justice. *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).
134.
European Court of Justice. 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).
135.
Dyson Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks (Case C-321/03) - [2007] ETMR 34. (2007).
136.
European Court of Justice. *Koninklijke Philips v Remington (Case C-299/99) [2002] ECR I-5475, [2002] ETMR 81. (2002).
137.
European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber). *Lego Juris v OHIM (Case C-48/09 P) [2010] ETMR 63. (2010).
138.
Trade Marks Registry (Appointed Person). Re Ghazilian’s Trade Mark Application [2002] RPC 33. (2002).
139.
Trade Marks Registry (Appointed Person). Re Basic Trademark SA’s Trade Mark Application [2005] RPC 25. (2005).
140.
Trade Marks Registry (Appointed Person). Dennis Woodman v French Connection [2007] RPC 1. (2007).
141.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
142.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
143.
Andrew Griffiths. The impact of the global appreciation approach on the boundaries of trade mark protection. Intellectual Property Quarterly 326–360 (2001).
144.
Phillips, Jeremy. Trade mark law: a practical anatomy. (Oxford University Press, 2003).
145.
Joshi, R. & Isaac, B. What does identical mean? European Intellectual Property Review 27, 184–187 (2005).
146.
Phillips, J. Strong trade marks and the likelihood of confusion in European law. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 1, 385–397.
147.
Schechter, F. The Rational Basis of Trade Mark Protection. Harvard Law Review 40, (1927).
148.
Gangjee, D. & Burrell, R. Because You’re Worth It: L’Oreal and the Prohibition on Free Riding. Modern Law Review 73, 282–295.
149.
Court: European Court of Justice. Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. (1999).
150.
*Case C-291/00 LTJ Diffusion v Sadas Vertbaudet, [2003] ECR I-2799, [2003] ETMR 83. (2003).
151.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Reed Executive Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd [2004] ETMR 56. (2004).
152.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1. (1998).
153.
Court: Court of First Instance, EC. Les Editions Albert Rene v OHIM (Case T-336/03) [2005] ECR II-4667. (2005).
154.
Court: European Court of Justice. Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. (1999).
155.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1. (1999).
156.
Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Opposition Division). Zanella SNC’s Community Trade Mark Application (B.42053) [2000] ETMR 69. (2000).
157.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1. (1998).
158.
Marca Mode CV v Adidas AG and Adidas Benelux (Case C-425/98 ). (2000).
159.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1. (1999).
160.
Court: European Court of Justice. Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV: C-342/97 [1999] ECR I-3819, [1999] All ER (EC) 587. (1999).
161.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-251/95 SABEL v Puma [1997] ECR I-6191, [1998] ETMR 1. (1998).
162.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1. (1999).
163.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1. (1999).
164.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-39/97 Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc [1998] ECR I-5507, [1999] ETMR 1. (1999).
165.
Case T-387/06 Inter-Ikea Systems BV v OHIM (IDEA/IKEA) [2009] ETMR 17. (2009).
166.
Advocate Generals Opinion. *Case C-292/00 Davidoff & Cie SA, Zino Davidoff SA v Gofkid Ltd [2003] ECR I 389, [2002] ETMR 99. (2002).
167.
European Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber). *Case C-408/01 Adidas-Salomon AG & Adidas Benelux BV v Fitnessworld Trading Ltd [2004] ETMR 10. (2004).
168.
European Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber). *Case C-408/01 Adidas-Salomon AG & Adidas Benelux BV v Fitnessworld Trading Ltd [2004] ETMR 10. (2004).
169.
European Court of Justice. Case C-375/97 General Motors v Yplon [2000] RPC 572. (2000).
170.
Chancery Division. Julius Sämann Ltd v Tetrosyl Ltd [2006] EWHC 529. (2006).
171.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). Case C-323/09 Interflora v Marks & Spencer plc [2012] ETMR 1. (2012).
172.
*Case C-252/07 Intel Corporation Inc v CPM United Kingdom Ltd [2009] ETMR 13. (2009).
173.
Benelux Court of Justice. Colgate-Palmolive BV v Koninklijke Distilleerderijen Erven Lucas Bols NV (1976) 7 IIC 420 (CLAERYN/KLAREIN). (1979).
174.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ). (2009).
175.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2010] ETMR 47 (Court of Appeal). (2010).
176.
Intellectual Property Office. Trade Marks Act 1994. (1994).
177.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
178.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
179.
Helen Norman. Time to blow the whistle on trade mark use? Intellectual Property Quarterly 1–34 (2004).
180.
Ilanah Simon. How does ‘essential function’ doctrine drive European mark trade law? International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 401–420 (2005).
181.
Andrew Griffiths. The trade mark monopoly: an analysis of the core zone of absolute protection under Art.5(1)(a). Intellectual Property Quarterly 3, 312–349 (2007).
182.
M. Senftlebel. Bringing EU Trademark Law Back Into Shape – Lessons to Learn from Keyword Advertising. (2011).
183.
Andrew Griffiths. The trade mark monopoly: an analysis of the core zone of absolute protection under Art.5(1)(a). Intellectual Property Quarterly 3, 312–349 (2007).
184.
Mothercare v Penguin Books [1988] R.P.C. 113. (1988).
185.
Helen Norman. Time to blow the whistle on trade mark use? Intellectual Property Quarterly 1–34 (2004).
186.
*Case C-291/00 LTJ Diffusion v Sadas Vertbaudet, [2003] ECR I-2799, [2003] ETMR 83. (2003).
187.
European Court of Justice. Case C-63/97 BMW v Deenik [1999] ECR I-905, [1999] 1 CMLR 1099. (1999).
188.
European Court of Justice. Case C-2/00 Hölterhoff v Ulrich Freiesleben [2002] ETMR 917. (2002).
189.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-206/01 Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed, [2002] ECR I-10273, [2003] ETMR 19 (ECJ). (2003).
190.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed [2003] ETMR 73 (CA). (2003).
191.
House of Lords. *R v Johnstone [2004] ETMR 2. (2004).
192.
Case C-48/05 Adam Opel v Autec [2007] ETMR 33. (2007).
193.
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). (2010).
194.
European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber). Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80. (2007).
195.
Chancery Division. RxWorks Ltd v Hunter [2007] EWHC 3061. (2007).
196.
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). (2010).
197.
European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber). Case C-324/09 L’Oreal SA v eBay International AG [2011] ETMR 53. (2011).
198.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). Case C-323/09 Interflora v Marks & Spencer plc [2012] ETMR 1. (2012).
199.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
200.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
201.
Roughton, A. Permitted Infringing Use: the Scope of Defences to an Infringement Action. in Trade mark use (Oxford University Press, 2005).
202.
Ilanah Simon. Nominative use and honest practices in industrial and commercial matters - a very European history. Intellectual Property Quarterly 117–147 (2007).
203.
Honestly, neither Celine nor Gillette is defensible! European Intellectual Property Review 30, 286–293 (2008).
204.
Christophe Geiger. Trade marks and freedom of expression - the proportionality of criticism. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 38, 317–327 (2007).
205.
Claire Howell. Trade marks: what constitutes ‘genuine use’? Laboratoires Goemar SA v La Mer Technology. European Intellectual Property Review 28, 118–121 (2006).
206.
Phillips, Jeremy. Trade mark law: a practical anatomy. (Oxford University Press, 2003).
207.
European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber). Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80. (2007).
208.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Hotel Cipriani Srl v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd [2010] RPC 16. (2010).
209.
Patents County Court. Redd Solicitors LLP v Red Legal Ltd [2012] EWPCC 54, [2013] ETMR 13. (2013).
210.
Case C-48/05 Adam Opel v Autec [2007] ETMR 33. (2007).
211.
European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber). Case C-100/02 Gerolsteiner & Brunnen GmbH & Co. v Putsch GmbH [2004] ETMR 40. (2004).
212.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). *Case 228/03 Gillette Company v LA-Laboratories Ltd Case [2005] ETMR 67. (2005).
213.
European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber). Case C-100/02 Gerolsteiner & Brunnen GmbH & Co. v Putsch GmbH [2004] ETMR 40. (2004).
214.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). *Case 228/03 Gillette Company v LA-Laboratories Ltd Case [2005] ETMR 67. (2005).
215.
European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber). Case C-17/06 Céline v Céline SA [2007] ECR I-7041, [2007] ETMR 80. (2007).
216.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ). (2009).
217.
Dowie-Whybrow, M. Core statutes on intellectual property. vol. Palgrave Macmillan core statutes (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013).
218.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). *Case C-533/06 O2 Holdings Ltd v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd [2008] ETMR 55. (2008).
219.
European Court of Justice (First Chamber). Case C-487/07 L’Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2009] ECR I-5185; [2010] RPC 1; [2009] ETMR 55 (ECJ). (2009).
220.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-40/01 Ansul BV and Ajax Brandbeveiliging BV (Minimax) [2003] ECR I-2439, [2003] ETMR 85. (2003).
221.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). Case C-259/02 La Mer Technology Inc v Laboratoires Goemar SA [2004] ETMR 47. (2004).
222.
Silberquelle GmbH v Maselli-Strickmode GmbH (C-495/07). (2009).
223.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). Case C-246/05 Armin Häupl v Lidl Stiftung & Co KG [2007] ETMR 61. (2007).
224.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
225.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
226.
Stothers, Christopher. Parallel trade in Europe: intellectual property, competition and regulatory law. (Hart, 2007).
227.
Gill Grassie. Parallel imports and trade marks - where are we? Part 1. European Intellectual Property Review 28, 474–479 (2006).
228.
Gill Grassie. Parallel imports and trade marks: Part 2: the repackaging cases. European Intellectual Property Review 28, 513–516 (2006).
229.
Keeling, David T. Intellectual property rights in EU law: Vol. 1: Free movement and competition law. vol. Oxford EC law library (Oxford University Press, 2003).
230.
Fhima, I. S. The Court of Justice’s protection of the advertising function of trade marks: an (almost) sceptical analysis. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 6, 325–329 (2011).
231.
European Court of Justice. Case 8/74 Procureur du Roi v Dassonville [1974] ECR 837 at 852, [1974] 2 CMLR 436. (1974).
232.
European Court of Justice. Cases C-15 & 16/74 Centrafarm v Sterling Drug, Centrafarm v Winthrop [1974] ECR 1147, 1183, [1974] 2 CMLR 480. (1974).
233.
European Court of Justice. Case C-317/91 Deutsche Renault AG v Audi AG [1993] ECR I-6227, [1995] 1 CMLR 461. (1995).
234.
European Court of Justice. Case C-355/96 Silhouette International Schmied GmbH v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH [1998] ECR I-4799, [1998] 2 CMLR 953. (1998).
235.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-414/99 Zino Davidoff SA v A&G Imports Ltd [2001] ECR I-8691, [2002] Ch 109, [2002] 1 CMLR 1. (2002).
236.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-414/99 Zino Davidoff SA v A&G Imports Ltd [2001] ECR I-8691, [2002] Ch 109, [2002] 1 CMLR 1. (2002).
237.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Mastercigars Direct Ltd v Hunters and Frankau [2007] ETMR 54. (2007).
238.
European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber). Case C-173/98 Sebago Inc and Ancienne Maison Dubois v GB Unic SA [1999] ETMR 681. (1999).
239.
European Court of Justice. *Case C–16/03 Peak Holding v Axolin-Elinor [2004] ECR I–11313, [2005] Ch 261, [2005] 2 WLR 650. (2005).
240.
Case C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay International [2011] RPC 27. (2011).
241.
Case C-59/08 Copad SA v Christian Dior Couture [2009] FSR 859 (22). (2009).
242.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-427/93 Bristol-Myers Squibb v Paranova [1996] ECR I-3457, [1997] 1 CMLR 1151. (1997).
243.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). *Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52. (2007).
244.
European Court of Justice. Case C-379/97 Pharmacia & Upjohn SA v Paranova A/S ("Paranova II”)[1999] ECR I-6927, [2000] 1 CMLR 51. (2000).
245.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). *Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52. (2007).
246.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-427/93 Bristol-Myers Squibb v Paranova [1996] ECR I-3457, [1997] 1 CMLR 1151. (1997).
247.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). *Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52. (2007).
248.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward [2008] EWCA Civ 83, [2008] ETMR 36. (2008).
249.
European Court of Justice. *Case C-143/00 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer I”) [2002] ECR I-3759, [2002] All ER (EC) 581. (2002).
250.
Chancery Division (Patents Court). Glaxo Group Ltd v Dowelhurst Ltd (No 2) [2000] FSR 529. (2000).
251.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). *Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52. (2007).
252.
European Court of Justice (Second Chamber). *Case C-348/04 Boehringer Ingelheim v Swingward Ltd and Dowelhurst ("Boehringer II”), [2007] ECR I-3391, [2007] 2 CMLR 52. (2007).
253.
Advocate Generals Opinion. *Case C-337/95 Parfums Christian Dior SA v Evora BV [1997] ECR I-1603. (1997).
254.
Case C-59/08 Copad SA v Christian Dior Couture [2009] FSR 859 (22). (2009).
255.
Case C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay International [2011] RPC 27. (2011).
256.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
257.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
258.
Pila, J. Copyright and Its Categories of Original Works. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 30, 229–254.
259.
Spence, M. Justifying Copyright. in Dear images: art, copyright and culture 389–403 (Ridinghouse:, ICA, 2002).
260.
Irini A. Stamatoudi. ‘Joy’ for the claimant: can a film also be protected as a dramatic work? Intellectual Property Quarterly 117–126 (2000).
261.
Richard Arnold. Joy: a reply. Intellectual Property Quarterly 10–21 (2001).
262.
Richard Arnold. Copyright in photographs: a case for reform. European Intellectual Property Review 27, 303–305 (2005).
263.
Andreas Rahmatian. Music and creativity as perceived by copyright law. Intellectual Property Quarterly 267–293 (2005).
264.
Tania S.L. Cheng. Does copyright law confer a monopoly over unpreserved cows? European Intellectual Property Review 276–281 (2006).
265.
Silver, I. & Lee, P. Protecting your Rights – Copyright in Computer Games: Nova Productions and Mazooma Games Ltd. European Intellectual Property Review 29, 251–255 (2007).
266.
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. (1988).
267.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No 2) [1999] FSR 79, [2000] FSR 363 (CA). (2000).
268.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Baigent & Leigh v Random House [2007] EWCA Civ 247, [2007] FSR 24. (2007).
269.
Chancery Division. Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] RPC 14. (2006).
270.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2007] RPC 25. (2007).
271.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Ltd [1982] Ch 119. (1982).
272.
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916).
273.
*Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Meltwater Holding BV [2012] RPC 1. (2012).
274.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No 2) [1999] FSR 79, [2000] FSR 363 (CA). (2000).
275.
Chancery Division. Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] RPC 14. (2006).
276.
Chancery Division. Lawson v Dundas. (1985).
277.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Sawkins v Hyperion Records [2005] RPC 32; [2005] 1 WLR 3281. (2005).
278.
Chancery Division. Creation Records v News Group Newspapers [1997] EMLR 444. (1997).
279.
Metix (UK) Ltd v G.H. Maughan (Plastics) Ltd [1997] FSR 718. (1997).
280.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Nova Productions Ltd v. Mazooma Games Ltd [2007] RPC 25 (CA). (2007).
281.
Court: Chancery Division. British Northrop Ltd v Texteam Blackburn Ltd [1974] RPC 57. (1974).
282.
Merchandising Corporation of America v Harpbond [1983] FSR 32. (1983).
283.
Supreme Court. *Lucasfilms v Ainsworth [2009] FSR 2. (2009).
284.
Supreme Court. *Lucasfilms v Ainsworth [2009] FSR 2. (2009).
285.
House of Lords. George Hensher Ltd v Restawile Upholstery (Lancs) Ltd [1976] AC 64. (1976).
286.
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916).
287.
House of Lords. Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273. (1964).
288.
Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539. (1900).
289.
Express Newspapers plc v News (UK) Ltd and others - [1990] 3 All ER 376. (1990).
290.
Cornish, W. R., Llewelyn, David, & Aplin, Tanya Frances. Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. (Sweet & Maxwell, 2013).
291.
Bently, Lionel & Sherman, Brad. Intellectual property law. (Oxford University Press, 2009).
292.
Nigel P. Gravells. Authorship and originality: the persistent influence of Walter v Lane. Intellectual Property Quarterly 3, 267–293 (2007).
293.
Zemer, L. Contribution and collaboration in joint authorship: too many misconceptions. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 1, 283–292.
294.
Rebecca Baines. Copyright in commissioned works: a cause for uncertainty. European Intellectual Property Review 27, 122–123 (2005).
295.
David Booton. The informal acquisition of copyright. Intellectual Property Quarterly 1, 28–49 (2011).
296.
Laddie, Justice. Copyright: over-strength, over-regulated, over-rated? European Intellectual Property Review 18, 253–260 (1996).
297.
Helberger, N., Dufft, N., Van Gompel, S. & Bernt Hugenholtz, P. Never forever: why extending the term of protection for sound recordings is a bad idea. European Intellectual Property Review 30, 174–181 (2008).
298.
Estelle Derclaye. 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 (2010).
299.
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601. (1916).
300.
House of Lords. Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273. (1964).
301.
Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539. (1900).
302.
Express Newspapers plc v News (UK) Ltd and others - [1990] 3 All ER 376. (1990).
303.
Privy Council (Hong Kong). *Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc [1989] AC 217. (1989).
304.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). *Sawkins v Hyperion Records [2005] RPC 32; [2005] 1 WLR 3281. (2005).
305.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). ZYX Music GmbH v King [1995] 3 All ER 1, [1997] 2 All ER 129. (1997).
306.
Chancery Division. Antiquesportfolio.Com Plc v. Rodney Fitch & Company Limited [2001] ECDR 5. (2001).
307.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). *Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, [2012] ECDR 6. (2012).
308.
Patents County Court. *Temple Island Collections Ltd v New English Teas Ltd [2012] FSR 9. (2012).
309.
*Infopaq International v Danske Dagblades Forening (Case C-5/08). (2009).
310.
European Court of Justice (Third Chamber). *Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, [2012] ECDR 6. (2012).
311.
*Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Meltwater Holding BV [2012] RPC 1. (2012).
312.
House of Lords. Newspaper Licensing Agency v Marks & Spencer Plc [2001] Ch 257 (CA); [2003] 1 AC 551 (HL). (2003).
313.
Chancery Division. *Robin Ray v Classic FM [1998] FSR 622. (1998).
314.
Chancery Division. Brighton v Jones [2005] FSR 16. (2005).
315.
Chancery Division. Hadley v Kemp [1999] EMLR 589. (1999).
316.
House of Lords. Fisher v Brooker [2007] EMLR 9; [2007] FSR 12 (Ch D); [2008] EMLR 13 (CA); [2009] 1 WLR 1764 (HL). (2009).
317.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Beckingham v Hodgens [2003] ECDR 6 (Ch D); [2003] EMLR 18 (CA). (2003).
318.
Court: Court of Appeal. Stevenson (or Stephenson) Jordan and Harrison Ltd v MacDonald and Evans (1952) 1 TLR 101. (1952).
319.
Chancery Division. *Noah v Shuba [1991] FSR 14. (1991).
320.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Griggs Group Ltd v Evans [2005] FSR 31. (2005).
