Waterfront has been included in the 2016 IP Stars Global Rankings. The rankings are awarded by Intellectual Property Magazine, which rates the best law firms in over 80 countries for IP protection, exploitation and enforcement.
For more information about the work of our Intellectual Property solicitors, click here.
Since the rankings are based on independent research with law firms, IP agencies and their clients, they can be relied upon to present an objective and respected view of the IP legal marketplace. Waterfront’s IP team has been particularly highlighted for its trade mark contentious work.
Joint Head of Intellectual Property and Dispute Resolution, Piers Strickland said, “We’re pleased to join the firmament of IP Stars. We have had an excellent year and it’s great to have that independently recognised by a prestigious IP publication.”
For more information about the Intellectual Property team’s work, call us on 020 7234 0200 or email contact@waterfront.law.
On 20th January 2025, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Thatchers Cider Company Limited (“Thatchers”) in a landmark trade mark infringement case against the discount supermarket chain, Aldi Stores Limited (“Aldi”). This decision overturned the earlier ruling by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (“IPEC”) and has…
As we begin 2025, the emergence and growth of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) shows no signs of slowing down. Many believe that AI has already outpaced the current legal and regulatory frameworks in the UK. This has led to businesses lacking the certainty and confidence they need to embrace…
The current legal framework in the UK does not allow copying of copyright-protected material for training generative AI models, except where it is carried out with permission of the copyright owner or done in a research or study context and for purely non-commercial purposes.
This matter deals with the Claimant’s (‘TVIS’) allegation of infringement and misrepresentation in relation to its “VETSURE” trade mark by the Defendant (‘Howserv’s’) “PETSURE” trade mark, used for pet insurance. In the first instance decision, the claim was dismissed due to the marks being highly descriptive and “not…