Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Mr Richard Arnold QC and Mr Mark Vanhegan (instructed by Wragge & Co for the Claimants Mr Geoffrey Hobbs QC and Ms Emma Himsworth (instructed by Lewis Silkin for the Defendant Hearing dates: March 2nd, 3rd 6th 8th 9th ____________________
iv) A blue graduated background with the lighter portion of the graduation at the bottom.
ii) If so, is there a prima facie case of infringement under article 5 (1)(b) of the Trade Marks Directive/section 10 (2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994;
iii) If the registrations are valid, is there a prima facie case of infringement under article 5 (2)/section 10 (3) of the 1994 Act;
iv) If there is a prima facie case of infringement on either ground, does H3G have a defence under the Comparative Advertising Directive;
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.