UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥

View the related practice notes about Date of filing

Application to register a UK trade mark

This Practice Note provides guidance on applying to register a trade mark at the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO). It deals with issues relating to conducting searches before making an application, the three-phase application process, making the application for registration, application fees, filing dates, claiming priority, classification of goods and services, search and examination, eligibility of the mark, absolute and relative grounds of refusal, examiner's objections, and publication of the application. It covers relevant provisions of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994).The registration of a trade mark gives the owner the exclusive right to prevent others from using that mark without their consent. It is important that any individual or company wishing to use a name or brand in respect of particular goods or services applies to register that mark to benefit from maximum protection.For more information about infringement of trade mark registrations, see Practice Note: Trade mark infringement—UK. Seeking protection through the common law tort of passing off for unregistered marks is dealt with in Practice Note: Introduction...

Jackson reforms on costs budgeting—one year on [Archived]

Jackson reforms on costs budgeting—one year on [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is for historical purposes only. The 1 April 2013 saw the introduction of a new approach to the costs management of litigation in England and Wales with costs estimates, in their old form, being abolished and costs budgeting being introduced. This cornerstone of the Jackson Reforms sought to ensure that courts could exercise control over the costs being expended by parties during litigation and in doing so ensure that they were reasonable and proportionate not just as to the value of the case but also that the court time was being used proportionately between all court users. Despite the time and effort put into the Jackson Reforms it was acknowledged early on that the rules regarding exemptions needed to be considered. A consultation has resulted in amendment to the costs budgeting exemption which will come into force on 22 April 2014 together with other amendments to the costs budgeting provisions. These changes are currently...

View the related precedents about Date of filing

Bonus schedule—EBITDA

Bonus schedule—EBITDA This Precedent is a sample bonus schedule, to be inserted as a schedule to an employment contract or director’s service agreement, providing for entitlement to an annual bonus to be calculated by reference to a company’s earning before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA). 1 Definitions 1.1 In this Schedule, the following expressions will, unless the context otherwise requires, have the meanings set opposite them: Accounts • the audited profit and loss account of the Company; Board • [the directors of the Company present at a meeting: (i) of directors of the Company or (ii) of a duly appointed committee of directors of the Company[, such meeting to be convened and quorate in accordance with the articles of association of the Company and the Companies Act 2006] OR the directors of the Company present at a meeting of directors of the Company[, such meeting to be convened and quorate in accordance with the articles of association of the Company and the Companies Act 2006] ]; Bonus...

View the related q&as about Date of filing

When appointing an administrator under paragraph 22 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986, what is the effect of a failure to obtain the consent of the Financial Conduct Authority or the Prudential Regulatory Authority to the appointment?

When appointing an administrator under paragraph 22 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986, what is the effect of a failure to obtain the consent of the Financial Conduct Authority or the Prudential Regulatory Authority to the appointment? There are a number of conflicting cases regarding the effect of failure to obtain prior Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)/Prudential Regulatory Authority consent and whether this amounts to a curable or incurable defect. In M.T.B Motors, His Honour Judge Hodge QC concluded that the failure to lodge the consent of the relevant regulator (then the Financial Services Authority) rendered the purported appointment void and not capable of being cured under either Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925, reg 7.55 nor paragraph 104 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). However, His Honour Judge Arnold in Re Ceart Risk Services Ltd considered that the lack of regulator consent was not so fundamental so as to invalidate the appointment but that the appointment took effect from the date consent was...

Where a claim is less than £50,000 what are filing rules under the CPR?

Where a claim is less than £50,000 what are filing rules under the CPR? When does the costs budget need to be filed? CPR 3.13 sets out the date for filing and exchange of the cost budget. The timing is specifically dependent on the value of the claim as stated on the claim form. CPR 13.1(a) provides that where the stated value of the claim on the claim form is less than £50,000, the costs budget must be filed and exchanged with the directions questionnaires. The court may also provide a different date for filing the cost budget. This can be set out in a court order, the note that accompanies the notice of proposed allocation, ie Form N149C or by court letter. What is meant by ‘‘not later than 21 days before’ This Q&A focuses on a scenario where there are 21 days between the date of filing and the date of the CMC. The decision in Page v RGC Restaurants Ltd is helpful...

View the related News about Date of filing

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—5 December 2024

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the UK Supreme Court and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council’s publication of their new Practice Directions and the launch of their new online case management portal as well as the Court of Appeal decision in Ali v HSF Logistics Polska SP ZOO (ex turpi causa and causation defences); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—5 December 2024

This week's edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes breaking news of the new MoJ personal injury discount rate, an occupier’s liability case concerning a professional motorcycle racer injured at a championship test day and a procedural decision concerning emailing a claim form to the incorrect court office. We also include our usual roundup of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest.