Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


LA Gear Inc v Hi-Tec Sports plc

[1992] FSR 121

Case summary last updated at 29/01/2020 17:42 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case LA Gear Inc v Hi-Tec Sports plc

C made a shoe. D began to sell a prototype shoe which C alleged was an infringing copy of C’s shoe. C sent letter to D enclosing a picture of C’s shoe, asking D to refrain from selling shoe. D refused and advertised its shoes for sale; C sued for secondary liability. Held:
·       D’s shoe was an infringing copy of C’s shoe.
·       Moreover, as D had received design drawings, was obvious D had reason to believe shoe it was selling was breach of copyright.
·       Thus D was liable for dealing in infringing copies.

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Intellectual Property Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious academic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Intellectual Property Law Notes

Intellectual Property Law Notes >>