Beautimatic International Ltd v Mitchell ; International Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Another

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtChancery Division
Year1999
Date1999

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
14 cases
  • Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and Others (Appellants/ Claimants) v Asda Stores Ltd (Respondent /Defendant)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 31 d2 Janeiro d2 2012
    ...1994, for example by Jacob J in British Sugar v James Robertson & Sons Ltd [1996] RPC 281; by Neuberger J in Premier Brands UK Ltd v Typhoon Europe Ltd [2000] FSR 267; by Pumfrey J in Decon laboratories v Fred Baker Scientific Ltd; and, indeed, by me in Julius Sämann Ltd v Tetrosyl Ltd ......
  • Decision Nº O/898/22 from Intellectual Property Office - (Trade market), 18 October 2022
    • United Kingdom
    • Intellectual Property Office (United Kingdom)
    • 18 d2 Outubro d2 2022
    ...so as to produce a narrow meaning which does not cover the goods in question.” 68. In Beautimatic International Ltd v Mitchell International Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Another, [2000] F.S.R. 267 (HC), Neuberger J. (as he then was) stated that: “I should add that I see no reason to give the wor......
  • Decision Nº O/213/20 from Intellectual Property Office - (Trade market), 6 April 2020
    • United Kingdom
    • Intellectual Property Office (United Kingdom)
    • 6 d1 Abril d1 2020
    ...so as to produce a narrow meaning which does not cover the goods in question." 14. In Beautimatic International Ltd v Mitchell International Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Another, [2000] F.S.R. 267 (HC), Neuberger J. (as he then was) stated that: Page 10 of 21 “I should add that I see no reason t......
  • Mulsanne Insurance Company Ltd v Marshmallow Financial Services Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 11 d5 Fevereiro d5 2022
    ...to an award of damages — see Reed Executive plc v Reed Business Information Ltd [2004] RPC 40, and Beautimatic International Ltd v Mitchell International Pharmaceuticals Ltd [2000] FSR 267. Both of those considerations applied here. So far as the noncontractual claims are concerned, damages......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Intellectual Property Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2005, December 2005
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 2005
    ...trade mark within its specification of goods or services (see Beautimatic International Ltd v Mitchell International Pharmaceuticals Ltd[2000] FSR 267) and should scrutinise the specification carefully, so as to ensure that it is not given a wide construction covering a vast range of goods ......