Junek Europ-Vertrieb GmbH v Lohmann & Rauscher International GmbH & Do. KG (C-642/16)
Pharmaceutical products imported by one EU member state from another are often repackaged in order to allow the parallel imported product access to the imported country's market. It is often considered that members of the public will be unwilling to purchase such products if they were in the language of another country. This would therefore create a barrier to the free circulation of goods in the EU – one of the core principles of the single market.
The Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") discusses to what extent is the application of a label to a pack ‘repackaging’ in a parallel importation case: Junek Europ-Vertrieb GmbH v Lohmann & Rauscher International GmbH & Do. KG. The interesting point in this case is that the label did not obscure the trade mark or conceal any printed information.
Amazon Could Be In "Hot Water" – CJEU To Consider: When Are Goods Being 'Offered' To The Market?
Brand owners will be fully aware of the challenges posed by Amazon in the fight against unlawful parallel or counterfeit goods. Often Amazon will make it easy for traders to sell such goods by offering various services to facilitate the sale of such goods. One such method is "Fulfilment by Amazon" under which Amazon stores and delivers such goods on behalf of the seller.
In a German case, the court has referred a question to the Court of Justice for the European Union ("CJEU") to determine if a third party storing unlawful parallel imported goods, unknowingly, on behalf of a seller could be liable for trade mark infringement.
Changes to off-payroll working for the private sector
In its Autumn Budget, the Government announced its intention for businesses in the private sector to become responsible for assessing an individual's employment status, where that individual engages with the business through their own company. This proposed change will bring the private sector in line with the public sector, which became subject to similar rules from April 2017. Nicola Allen, Senior Associate from the Employment team provides further insight.
Christmas, after parties and employer's vicarious liability
As the nights are getting colder and the mince pies are coming out it can only mean one thing…Christmas is almost upon us! And as many HR professionals will be only too aware, with Christmas comes the much-anticipated Christmas party and often uncharacteristic staff behaviour. James Collings, Partner in the Employment team looks further into this.
Court of Appeal confirms Morrison's liability for rogue employee
There has been much commentary on the recent Court of Appeal decision which confirmed that VM Morrisons Supermarket PLC ('Morrisons') was vicariously liable for a deliberate, and criminal, data breach by an employee. In this article, GDPR specialist and former Data Protection Officer, Helen Mouser considers the steps employers can take to try and protect themselves from being liable for the actions of rogue employees.
Online availability of Employment Tribunal Decisions
Employment tribunal decisions have been made available online for over a year. Kathryn Evens reflects on the service and looks at the implications of this and how employers should also exercise caution when using it to conduct checks on staff and new recruits.
In Brief – October Monthly Round Up
To help you keep quickly up to date with employment law, we summarise the key developments arising from cases, guidance, legislation and consultations for this month.
Recent Supreme Court Judgement is the icing on the discrimination debate where religion, sexuality and politics collide
The Supreme Court in Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and Others recently handed down its long awaited and controversial decision on the "gay cake case" in which a Christian bakery, which refused to provide a cake with a message supporting gay marriage, was held not to be discriminatory. However, a lot of the controversy surrounding the decision is due to a misunderstanding of the direct discrimination test applied.
Changes flowing from the Taylor Review - Itemised Payslips
Following the Government's response to the Taylor Review looking at modern employment practices and staffing structures in February 2018 some recommendations are starting to be put in place. Kathryn Evens, senior associate in our people and employment team, takes a closer look at the changes that are being made to itemised payslips for workers and what employers need to do.
What will a "no deal" mean for workplace rights?
With no current agreement in place with the EU and March 2019 approaching fast, the UK government is beginning to accelerate its contingency planning for a potential "no deal" outcome. Helen Dallimore, managing associate in our people and employment team takes a look at what the impact of a "no deal" will be on workplace rights and the steps employers should consider taking in preparation.
Depending on what you read and where you read it, the position on whether it is likely that a deal will be reached with the EU on Brexit varies considerably and seems to change on an hourly basis.
Until the outcome of the negotiations is determined and the Withdrawal Agreement is signed by the UK and EU and ratified by their respective Parliaments there remains a possibility of a no-deal. Inevitably this creates significant uncertainty for UK citizens and businesses.