Trade Mark Disputes

Back to Trade Marks

Our Trade Mark team coordinates trade mark oppositions, invalidity actions, revocations and litigation across the globe. We also manage worldwide trade mark watch services. 

The team has experience representing clients in contentious proceedings before the UKIPO and EUIPO, as well as on appeal before the Appointed Person in the UK and before the Boards of Appeal at the EUIPO. We also act on further appeals up to the General Court and Court of Justice. We manage disputes strategically and understand that contentious proceedings often need to be addressed as part of global business objectives. 

We work with clients to devise dispute strategies that fit with budgets and are proportionate to the agreed objectives. Enforcement policies often begin with having a suitable watch service in place and our team uses such services to ensure disputes are identified, and ideally dispensed with, at an early stage. 

Trade mark disputes are frequently cross-jurisdictional and such international disputes make up a large part of our practice. Our Trade Mark team has experience both lodging claims directly and working with trusted partners in other territories. We pro-actively manage multi-jurisdictional disputes to ensure a holistic and consistent approach is taken. As part of any dispute we manage, we regularly review client objectives and the merits, as both can change as a case develops. 

It is important to be pragmatic, so we will always consider methods for resolving disputes through amicable settlement and alternative dispute resolution, e.g. negotiation, mediation and arbitration. Our disputes practice extends from actions before the registries, to litigation before the courts and ADR forums. Trade mark disputes are not dealt with by the team in isolation, and our team is also able to assist with related domain and/or company name disputes and/or designs disputes.

View our Trade Marks team
 

<< Back to Trade Marks


Feed

16/05/2024
A broader interpretation of "substance or composition" - good news for...
A recent decision from the EPO Boards of Appeal (T 1252/20) potentially paves the way for more diverse products to be patentable in Europe using the medical use claim format.The back­ground:Art­icle 53(c)...
06/05/2024
CMS Expert Guide to transferring IP rights
In recent years, IP rights have become an increasingly important asset not only for R&D and technology based companies but also for consumer product manufacturers and life sciences companies, for example...
Comparable
11/04/2024
Navigating clinical trial disclosures: No reasonable expectation of success...
Recent EPO Board of Appeal decision T 1437/21 adds to a growing number of decisions concerning the patentability of second or further medical use inventions where the prior art relates to a clinical trial...
03/04/2024
EP Case Law in Brief: Long-felt want and inventive step
“Where the invention solves a technical problem which workers in the art have been attempting to solve for a long time, or otherwise fulfils a long-felt need, this may be regarded as an indication of...
25/03/2024
Patentability of inventions relating to diagnostic methods at the EPO
Under Article 53(c) of the European Patent Convention (EPC), diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body are excluded from patentability. The purpose behind this exclusion is to avoid patent...
18/01/2024
EP Case Law in Brief: Commercial success and inventive step
“Commercial success alone is not to be regarded as indicative of inventive step, but evidence of immediate commercial success when coupled with evidence of a long-felt want is of relevance provided...
29/11/2023
10 CMS partners recognised by Lexology Client Choice Awards 2023
International law firm CMS is pleased to announce that 10 of its partners, across nine different countries, have been recognised by the Lexology Client Choice Awards 2023:Nick Beckett, China, Life Sci­ences Car­oline...
23/11/2023
Patentability of AI inventions: High Court offers a helping hand (Emotional...
Is a deep learning AI system which recommends similar songs to its users patentable? Or is it a computer program ‘as such’ and therefore excluded under s.1(2)(c) Patents Act 1977? The High Court has...
21/11/2023
EP Case Law in Brief: Proof of common general knowledge
It is a common sight for a patent attorney – an EPO Examiner acknowledges that a claim is novel, but asserts a lack of inventive step over ‘D1’ in combination with ‘common general knowledge’...
16/11/2023
CMS and IPDefine Announce Global Patent Initiative
International law firm CMS, in collaboration with patent AI specialist IPDefine Ltd., have developed a cutting-edge turnkey solution which is poised to make intellectual property monetisation more accessible...
07/11/2023
Description amendments at the EPO – the Appellant agrees with the need...
Description amendments bringing the content of the description in line with the allowed claims remain a controversial topic in the European practice. As reported previously, the Board of Appeal in T0056/21...
16/10/2023
Beyond the language barrier
Getting the deal done | 8 min read Getting an M&A deal over the line is a big task in any context. The task is even greater when a transaction involves multiple jurisdictions, people and cultures. Understanding the bigger picture and commercial objectives makes it easier to focus on the legal provisions that really matter. This article sets out the main differences and challenges cross-border transactions present and the key factors that determine dealmaking success.