Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / Jeremy Phillips / Judicial appointment / New judge on the block

New judge on the block

- ,
Amid all the excitement of the past few days the IPKat quite forgot to congratulate Christopher Floyd QC on his appointment as judge in the Patents Court - part of the Chancery Division - in England and Wales. Christopher, of 11 South Square, has practised in all fields of intellectual property law, with particular emphasis on patent cases in all technical disciplines.

The IPKat and Merpel join in respectfully wishing him the very best of luck in his new appointment, with the hope that he will take a ruggedly interventionist and proactive role in case management for the benefit of all disputing parties. Christopher's greatest hits include
* Celltech v MedImmune [2004] EWCA Civ 1331
* Ivax Pharmaceuticals (UK) v Astrazeneca AB [2004] EWHC 1264 (Ch)
* Russell Finex v Telsonic [2004] EWHC 474 (Ch)
* Cairnstores v Aktiebolaget Hassle [2002] EWCA Civ 1504 - this is one of the IPKat's favourites, when the losers tried to have the trial judge hung, drawn and quartered for (i) being on the winning party's side and (ii) rabidly attacking a pet witness for the losers.
New judge on the block New judge on the block Reviewed by Jeremy on Tuesday, September 25, 2007 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.