Is the Intellectual Property Court working?

Overall its positive namely

“Legal practitioners are unanimous in their assessment that the ability of SMEs/individuals to gain access to justice has been greatly improved by the reforms;

  • The costs cap (recoverable scale up to £50,000) and ACM by judges are clearly identified as the most important reforms;
  • Regarding the costs cap, the benefit is that litigants know their potential exposure before initiating a claim; in practice, a costs award of less than £40,000 is commonly awarded to the winning party;
  • Meanwhile, ACM clarifies and limits claims – greatly speeding up the process of litigation;
  • The SCT is seen as a useful option – particularly for individuals and small enterprises that previously may not have attempted to litigate;
  • The damages cap (£500,000) is seen as relatively unimportant (in most cases the interim and/or final injunction is seen as the main goal for litigants);
  • The reforms have opened up the IPEC MT to a wider range of representatives – there has been greater participation by patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys, in addition to the continuing presence of solicitors and barristers.”

The report can be read here

If you’d like to know more about this article please send an email to Michael Coyle quoting the article title and any questions you might have, alternatively call the office number on 02380 235 979 or send an enquiry through our contact form.

share this Article

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

Recent Articles

Nike v StockX, NFTs and Counterfeit products

American footwear and apparel company Nike has launched trademark infringement actions against the Detroit-based trainers and streetwear resale platform StockX, after allegedly using Nike’s Intellectual