! Please enable JavaScript to view this site correctly.
! You are viewing this site on an outdated browser. Upgrade now to view this site correctly.
It has been announced that official fees charged by the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) will increase on 1st April 2026. The changes apply across the full range of patent, trade mark and design services. The last increases levied by the UKIPO were in 2018 for patent fees, 2016 for design fees and as far back as 1998 for trade mark fees. During that period, inflation has risen by about 32% and the UKIPO states that an increase has become…
Do you (or does your client) own a ‘cloned’ or ‘comparable’ UK trade mark right that was split from an EU trade mark registration (EUTM) at the end of the Brexit transition period? Since comparable UK rights were born from EUTMs, the UK introduced transitional rules for ‘use’ following Brexit. Currently, use of the EUTM anywhere in the EU before 1st January 2021 (whether in the UK or elsewhere in the EU) counts as use of the comparable UK right…
On 25th March 2025, Nyetimber Limited, a respected and prominent producer of English sparkling wine, initiated proceedings in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) against Salcombe Distilling Co., alleging passing off. The dispute concerns the use by Salcombe of the stylised wording “Product of England” on its gin labels. Nyetimber alleges this use mimics the same term as it appears on its own labels. Nyetimber, which has produced English sparkling wine in the South Downs since 2006, has within its…
The United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) has released a new Practice Amendment Notice (PAN 1/25), effective 30th June 2025, which significantly alters the scope of examination of trade mark applications, and essentially, applications that may be deemed to included overly broad terms or extensive lists of goods and services. This development aims to in the UKIPO words "clarify the behaviour expected of trade mark applicants" and ensure that the goods and/or services listed under trade mark applications when filed…
According to feedback from various Russian law firms, the practice of brand "hijacking" has become prevalent in Russia this year. Not only do Western brand owners faced an increased risk of losing their established Russian trade mark rights, but they also face the prospect of never being able to re-enter the Russian market in the future, if, or when, the Russia-Ukraine conflict resolves and some kind of normality returns to that part of the world. Background The conflict involving Russia…
The Court of Appeal has recently handed down its much-anticipated judgment in the latest iteration of the Thatchers Cider Company Limited v Aldi Stores Limited row, overturning aspects of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court's (IPEC) earlier, controversial decision. The Court of Appeal concluded that Aldi’s "look-a-like" product took unfair advantage of Thatchers’ trade mark, establishing trade mark infringement. The decision marks a significant victory for brand owners seeking to protect their brand against "look-a-like" products and will no doubt be…
On 15th November 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited decision in the case of SkyKick v Sky. The decision is a very important one for the trade mark profession because it significantly reshapes the landscape of UK trade mark law. In essence, there are now grounds to argue (and succeed) for a case of “bad faith” where a trade mark application has been filed using a very broad specifications of goods and/or services. Until now, this broad filing…
Background On 27 June 2024, the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) issued a decision (under case reference O/0611/24) for a trade mark opposition case in which the opponent (Netflix Studios, LLC) had claimed the applicant (Zheng Shu) had filed a trade mark application in bad faith and contrary to the law of passing off. The mark in question was for the sign “Thinkingcaphellfireclub”, filed by Zheng Shu on 10 June 2022 in relation to toys and games. It was opposed…
Background This trade mark case involved an opposition based on Section 5(2)(b) as well as a claim for "bad faith" under Section 3(6). The opposition was partially successful under the Section 5(2)(b) ground, but the opponent’s lack of evidence meant that they were unable to establish bad faith and this claim under Section 3(6) failed in its entirety. Details On 8 September 2022, the Turkish applicant MEMİŞOĞLU TARIM ÜRÜNLERİ TİCARET LİMİTED ŞİRKETİ filed a UK trade mark application to register…
If you are a business owner dealing with a trade mark dispute and being challenged by another party in tribunal proceedings, then it is sometimes important to know how to manage the scope of your trade mark registration or application in so far as the goods and/or services it covers because successfully doing so can often lead to settlement and moving past the dispute. This practice notice from the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) offers guidance on how to handle…