- Publicity orders and costs following a defendant’s Part 36 offer (Philip Warren & Sons v Lidl))
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- Publicity orders
- What was the background?
- The parties
- The claim
- Judgment on liability
- What did the court decide?
- Publicity order
- Case details
IP analysis: This decision gives detailed guidance about the correct approach to publicity orders and costs in a passing off claim. In relation to publicity orders, the court reviewed the leading authority Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Apple Inc and the recent decision of Mr Justice Warby in HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Press v Associated Newspapers Ltd to produce a summary of the factors to be considered when the court is considering making a publicity order. The court’s decision on costs is equally helpful, as it involves consideration of several issues, such as: when it will be appropriate to make an order for indemnity costs where a claimant fails to obtain a judgment more advantageous than a defendant’s Part 36 offer; the consequences of a party refusing to mediate; and how the parties’ partial success on different issues should be factored in. The publicity order section will be particularly helpful to those specialising in IP. However, the court’s decision on costs is relevant to all civil litigation practitioners. Written by Nicole Bollard, barrister at 3PB Barristers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial