IP analysis: In a decisive ruling on revocation for non-use, the High Court allowed an appeal against a decision of the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) and revoked a trade mark registration for ‘MOMOFUKU’ in respect of restaurant services. The sole issue on appeal was whether the Hearing Officer had erred in finding that the mark had been put to genuine use in the UK during the relevant five-year period. The court found that the decision’s reasoning was undermined by material errors of fact and illogical conclusions, and that the evidence relied upon did not meet the threshold required. This judgment provides important guidance for trade mark practitioners, particularly those advising clients who operate overseas brands with UK registrations. It reinforces that even where services are delivered outside the UK, the use of a mark within the UK must still be justified in the relevant economic sector as creating or preserving an outlet for those services. Written by Vincent Liu, associate at JMW Solicitors LLP.

Private Client analysis: The court found that (i) the deceased had, with the assistance of her solicitor, effectively revoked her last Will by destruction with the requisite intent, and, despite the conclusion drawn by the parties’ single joint expert who was not cross-examined, (ii) on the basis of the solicitor’s evidence the deceased had the requisite capacity to revoke her Will, such that her estate passed to her sister on an intestacy. Written by Oliver Hilton, barrister at Radcliffe Chambers, Lincoln’s Inn.

Law360: The son-in-law of a dead Russian mining oligarch lost his claim against Revolut on 25 January 2024 over the financial technology company's decision to close his account, as a London judge ruled the claim was an abuse of process.

Law360, London: An online banking subsidiary of Revolut Group Holdings Ltd has been granted a UK banking licence, allowing it to expand its financial services and potentially offer customers in Britain traditional banking products such as loans and savings accounts, the lender said on 25 July 2024.

Typically used to provide liquidity for a company's day-to-day operations. The borrower is under no obligation to actually take out a loan at any particular time, but may take part of the funds at any time over a period of several years.

A loan under which amounts can be repaid and re-borrowed during the life time of the loan.

A defence based partly on privilege relating to the publication of defamatory statements which comply with the various criteria relating to 'responsible journalism' and whether or not the statement or content in question was something which the public was entitled to know about as set out in the case of Reynolds v Times Newspapers [1999] All ER (D) 1172.

Interest or usury.

The Insolvency Service has successfully prosecuted Rico Iheagwara for fraudulently obtaining two £20,000 Bounce Back Loans (BBLs) for his company, SJR Recruitment Limited, which was not trading at the time. Iheagwara secured the loans from different banks, despite businesses being entitled to only one loan under the scheme. He transferred the funds into his personal account and used them for personal expenses. SJR Recruitment was placed into liquidation in 2021 with liabilities exceeding £67,000. Iheagwara was sentenced to 18 months in prison, suspended for 18 months and ordered to complete 120 hours of unpaid work and 15 days of rehabilitation activity. The Insolvency Service is seeking to recover the fraudulently obtained funds under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

A right of entry is the legal entitlement to go onto another’s land or into premises without committing trespass, arising from contract (especially leases), property rights, or statute. The term is descriptive and used across contexts; particular powers are defined and limited by specific legislation and case law.In leases, a landlord’s right of entry to inspect, repair or comply with obligations is usually an express covenant, exercisable for stated purposes, on reasonable notice and at reasonable times; it does not permit harassment or use beyond its purpose, and refusal typically requires a court order or injunction rather than self-help.A distinct concept is the right of re-entry on breach (forfeiture/termination). In England & Wales (and broadly in Northern Ireland) this generally requires prior statutory notice (e.g. section 146 Law of Property Act 1925), and “peaceable re-entry” is restricted, particularly for dwellings. In Scotland, the equivalent remedy is irritancy, governed by common law and statute, with notice requirements. In Ireland, forfeiture/termination proceeds by court order under landlord and tenant legislation.Statutory rights of entry (e.g. for regulators, police, planning/building control, utilities) and easements/servitudes or wayleaves permit access for defined purposes, often with notice, warrant and compensation safeguards.

This requires a shareholder who wishes to sell its shares to offer them to the other shareholders in accordance with the pre-emption procedure, but is not required to identify a third party purchaser. There is an exclusivity period during which the selling shareholder can only negotiate with the other shareholders. If agreement to purchase such shares is not reached, the selling shareholder can sell the shares to a third party at a price which is greater than that offered by the other shareholders. ROFO is an alternative to the right of first refusal (ROFR) and, unlike ROFR which is considered to favour the other shareholders (ie not the selling shareholder), a ROFO is considered to favour the selling shareholder.

A right of first refusal is a contractual right giving one party the opportunity to enter into a transaction before the grantor deals with a third party. It commonly arises in shareholdings, joint ventures, business sales, commercial leases and property co‑ownership, where an owner must first offer the asset to the right‑holder on the same or specified terms before selling, leasing or otherwise disposing of it to someone else.In UK and Irish practice, the expression is used descriptively rather than having a single statutory definition, although specific legislation (for example, residential landlord and tenant “first refusal” regimes and certain partnership or trust provisions) may create analogous pre‑emption rights with detailed procedural rules.Key features typically include: the trigger event (such as intended sale), the method and timing of the offer, valuation or price‑setting mechanics, consequences of non‑compliance, and whether the right is personal or runs with the asset. Breach may give rise to damages, injunctions or, in some contexts, orders setting aside a non‑compliant disposal. Usage and underlying concepts are broadly consistent across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, subject to differing land law and registration requirements.