Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Waterman (Pete) Ltd v CBS United Kingdom Ltd

[1993] EMLR 27

Case summary last updated at 02/02/2020 19:08 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Waterman (Pete) Ltd v CBS United Kingdom Ltd

C was a successful pop-music production company known to UK public as ‘The Hit Factory’. C did not trade as ‘the Hit Factory’, but had released three compilation albums of their hits under that title. D, a record company who owned a studio in London, entered into agreement with owner of a studio in New York for refurbishment and running of London studio. New York company had traded as ‘The Hit Factory’ since 1970, and granted licence to D to use that name. C sued for passing off. Held:
 
Browne Wilkinson VC
·        See notes
·        I personally believe test of whether C had a  ‘trade connection’ to UK is preferable
Ø  However because of previous higher authority, the most liberal interpretation it is possible to give test is that C needs UK customers
·        On facts, New York studio has had substantial number of customers in UK since its creation
Ø  Thus is entitled to use its name within the UK

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 adademic 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 >>