tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post8436135798521525207..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: "Subtle but insidious" transfer from pheasant to pigeon cooks Fraser's gooseVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-18543300998899621722016-04-12T10:49:40.095+01:002016-04-12T10:49:40.095+01:00A decision has now been issued in respect of the c...A decision has now been issued in respect of the claimant's request for an account of profits:<br />http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2016/626.htmlKantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-52307532243068522502014-02-03T10:28:54.454+00:002014-02-03T10:28:54.454+00:00It is interesting to note that House of Fraser fai...It is interesting to note that House of Fraser failed to explain fully the provenance of its mark or whether staff were aware of the Jack Wills brand (given that the slogans for both were very similar there has to be an inference)... if you were trying to be clever you might "lose" such evidence on the basis that it would ruin your position under s. 10(3) since it would show intention. I am pleased that Arnold J did not feel constrained by the need for intention to be shown in order for it to be "unfair".<br /><br />This is one of those cases where I would love to read the cross-examination and see the witness statements.iPuffinnoreply@blogger.com