Mr Justice Lewison has delivered a monster-sized judgment in the O2 v Hutchison comparative advertising case. The conclusion at the end of his 223 paragraph judgment [is this a new record for a trade mark case?] is:
  1. O2's bubble marks are valid. They don't lack distinctiveness;
  2. While there was prima-facie s.10(2) (confusion-based infringement), Hutchison had a defence under the Comparative Advertising Directive;
  3. There was no s.10(3) (dilution-based) infringement, and even if there had been, Hutchison would have been covered by a Comparative Advertising Directive defence.

The IPKat will bring you more when he's had time to read the case. A skim-through shows that all our old favourites are there, including Arsenal v Reed, Johnstone and Philips v Remington.

O2 v HUTCHISON O2 v HUTCHISON Reviewed by Unknown on Thursday, March 23, 2006 Rating: 5


Peter Groves said...

Not a record: Healing Herbs v Bach Flower Remedies CH 1997-H-NO.1231 was 305 paragraphs.

Jeremy said...

Healing Herbs v Bach Flower Remedies may have more paragraphs, but it's only 23,902 words. O2 v Hutchison is 32,950. HOWEVER ... the longest is Mr Justice Laddie's epic judgment in Glaxo and others v Dowelhurst and others, which weighs in at a massive 39,501 words.

The IP Dog said...

What about Occular Science? That was a big-un!

The IP Dog said...

Oops - see you you were only talking about TM cases!!!
Duh . . .

Michael said...

Do you have any news for this case?


Powered by Blogger.