Design in UK Law

In this Topic
Leading Cases
  • L Woolley Jewellers Ltd and A & A Jewellery Ltd and A & A Jewellery (London) Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 31 Julio 2002

    Here the judge was diverted to certain difficult questions arising as to substantiality in copyright infringement which may have no relevance to design right infringement.

  • Magmatic Ltd v Pms International Ltd
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 11 Julio 2013

    PMS contends that the design corpus includes all designs which qualify as prior art under Article 7(1) of the Regulation and are not excluded by either the obscure designs exception or the confidential disclosures exception. Magmatic disputes this, and contends that the design corpus consists of the designs with which the informed user is likely to be familiar.

  • Green Lane Products Ltd v PMS International Group Ltd and Others
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 19 Julio 2007

    But upon registration of a design specifying class A as the intended class of products, it becomes unlawful to use the design for products in class D without the consent of the holder of the registered design. He is well aware of the old design, but has not used or prepared to use it yet, although all his competitors have. But why should he not use an old and well-known design within his own field of operation?

  • Newspaper Licensing Agency v Marks & Spencer Plc
    • House of Lords
    • 12 Julio 2001

    The House of Lords decided in Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273 that the question of substantiality is a matter of quality rather than quantity. That question, as it seems to me, must be answered by reference to the reason why the work is given copyright protection. It follows that the quality relevant for the purposes of substantiality is the literary originality of that which has been copied.

  • A. Fulton Company Ltd v Totes Isotoner (UK) Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Noviembre 2003

    "This means that the proprietor can trim his design right claim to most closely match what he believes the defendant to have taken. The defendant will not know in what the alleged monopoly resides until the letter before action, or, more usually, the service of the statement of claim. This means that a plaintiff's pleading has particular importance. It not only puts forward the claim but is likely to be the only statement of what is asserted to be the design right."

  • Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors Group
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 21 Enero 2009

    First, although the Act allows design right to subsist in (and be claimed for) part of an article, the definition of reproduction speaks only of making “articles”. There is, therefore, a linguistic mismatch between subsistence of design right and the right that it confers. Second, even if the design has been copied, the infringing article must be produced “exactly or substantially” to the copied design.

  • Hensher (George) Ltd v Restawile Upholstery (Lancs.) Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Julio 1973

    It seems to us that the Judge has in effect come to the conclusion that in the field of furniture all that is needed to qualify as a work of artistic craftsmanship is a sufficient originality of design to qualify as a design under the Designs Act. It seems to us to give no sufficient effect to the word "artistic" in the definition in the 1956 Act. Mere originality in points of design aimed at appealing to the eye as commercial selling points will not in our judgment suffice.

See all results
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
    • Nbr. 2-2, February 1973
    • Personnel Review
    • 68-73
    Industrial sociologists and psychologists have often paid little more than scant attention to the actual work of the people they have been studying. The literature is full of brief comments about t...
  • Survey research design
    • Nbr. 19-4, December 2001
    • Library Hi Tech
    • 419-421
    This column continues a series on topics in research methodology, statistics and data analysis techniques for the library and information sciences. It discusses issues related to the design of surv...
  • Lords Design Constraints
    • Nbr. 59-3, May 1996
    • The Modern Law Review
  • Design for Production
    • Nbr. 81-9/10, September 1981
    • Industrial Management & Data Systems
    • 2-4
    Good design is not some mysterious quality that only successful manufacturers can afford. Every manufacturer employs designers, although they are often called engineers, who take an idea and develo...
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results
  • Chapter CIPRG1135
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . Rights in designs allow businesses to prevent others from copying a design or drawings of the design and significant parts of the design. In the broadest sense design ......
  • Chapter INTM342620
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . Registered Designs. ICTA88/S537B contains provisions mirroring those in S536 that apply to design right.”Design” is defined in Section 213(2) of the Copyright, ......
  • Chapter CG68240
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . . Unregistered designs may be protected in law under Part III of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988). . Part III of the CDPA 1988 provides that a ......
  • Chapter CG68230
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . . The term “design” is defined in S1 (2) Registered Designs Act 1949 as: . the appearance of the whole or a part of a product resulting from the features of, in ......
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT