From Star Chamber to Star Trek Chamber: a new name and a competition

Today's the day the Patents County Court (PCC) in England and Wales is officially renamed the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC). The change, ostensibly, is taking place in order to reflect the court’s jurisdiction more accurately, since it is there as a facility for litigating all IP rights, not just patents. So far, it has not been possible to confirm the rumour that, in keeping with the ethos of this new name, judges presiding over the rebranded tribunal are to be designated by a special new title or that they are to be addressed as "Your Efficiency" in place of the somewhat stuffy "Your Honour". Nor has it been possible to ascertain whether the European Union is considering a similar move, to bring the title of the EU's top legislative chamber more in line with its activities by deleting any reference in its title to the misleading word "Justice" ...

The newly-renamed court's facilities are said
to be "literally out of this world" ...
The IPKat is delighted that the name of the Patents County Court is being changed, especially since the court didn't have a great deal to do with counties, but he can't help thinking that "Intellectual Property Enterprise Court" is a bit of a mouthful and he wonders whether something more succinct and a little less pompous couldn't have been thought up.  The word "Enterprise" seems a little odd too, since that word has for most of his life been associated with a Starship on which the intrepid travellers never seem to be wearing safety belts when various calamities strike, as well as with the most painful split infinitive known to the sensitive English ear.

Merpel is all in favour of enterprise, so she's going to be a little bit enterprising herself.  Having purr-loined stolen discreetly extracted from Jeremy a copy of the latest edition of the Butterworths Intellectual Property Law Handbook which he edits, she is offering it as a prize for whoever comes up with the best and, ideally, most IP-relevant anagram of the words "Intellectual Property Enterprise Court". Entries to the IPKat at with the subject line "IPEC" by not later than 31 October 2013, please.

Star Chamber here
Star Trek here
From Star Chamber to Star Trek Chamber: a new name and a competition From Star Chamber to Star Trek Chamber: a new name and a competition Reviewed by Jeremy on Tuesday, October 01, 2013 Rating: 5


  1. Being a child of the 1970s I grew up watching repeats of the original Star Trek before the concept of a split infinitive was ever even remotely introduced to me.

    And of course, according to the Oxford University Press, the rule is based on a fallacy :-) (

    For the record, the latest USS Enterprise was upgraded to include some funky extending/retracting seat belts in the latest film.


  2. Is there any rational reason that it couldn't have just been the "Intellectual Property Court"?

    What if I want to protect my rights but I am not enterprising, do I need to go somewhere else?

  3. PCC renamed the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court and the abbreviation (IPEC) has been coined. A brief check reveals, UK 2538689 IPEC registered covering ‘Legal advice; legal services; intellectual property services’in class 45 in the name of Clarke and Hartland Solicitors of Cardiff. Clarke and Hartland use IPEC as their Intellectual Property advice service.
    You would perhaps have thought that the PCC/IPEC might have checked?!

  4. Whatever it is called, it still seems to be lacking its judge... I hope Mr Justice Birss's replacement will emerge soon!

  5. Here's an anagram for any academic IP lawyers who are considering applying to be judges of IPEC:

    Pert Lecturers to Plenipotentiary Lucre


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:

Powered by Blogger.