³ÉÈËÓ°Òô

View the related practice notes about Paris Convention

The UK nuclear liabilities regime

The UK nuclear liabilities regime The UK is a party to the international nuclear liabilities regime established by the 1960 Paris Convention and its subsequent amendment agreements. These international obligations are implemented by the Nuclear Installations Act 1965 (NuIA 1965), as amended by various primary and secondary legislation to reflect Convention amendments and UK policy choices within the permitted parameters. The most recent of these is the Energy Act 2023 (EnA 2023), which amends the NulA 1965 to implement the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC), which is not yet in force. This article summarises the evolution and current position of UK nuclear liability law and discusses the changes brought about by the EnA 2023 to the NulA 1965. International treaty background 1963 Vienna Convention The UK signed, but never ratified the Vienna Convention. Although it shares core principles with the Paris Convention, which the UK did ratify (see below), there are incompatibilities which mean that it is not possible to be party to both. The 1988 Joint...

Singapore—revocation of a patent

Singapore—revocation of a patent This Practice Note was originally written for LexisAdvance® Practical Guidance Singapore. Grounds for revocation of a patent Pursuant to section 80(1) of the Patents Act (Cap 221), a patent may be revoked on the grounds that: • the invention is not a patentable invention (in other words, it is not novel, does not involve an inventive step and/or is not capable of industrial application) • the patent was granted to a person who is not entitled to be granted that patent • the patent specification does not disclose the invention clearly and completely for it to be performed by a person skilled in the art • the patent specification discloses an additional matter in the application beyond that is disclosed in the application • an amendment or correction was made to the patent specification which should not have been allowed • the patent was obtained fraudulently, on any misrepresentation and on any non-disclosure or inaccurate disclosure of any prescribed material information, and...

View the related precedents about Paris Convention

Ireland—Intellectual property assignment—party-neutral

This Precedent is an assignment of intellectual property rights that has been drafted to be generally neutral to each party. It contains alternative or optional wording that may favour the assignor or assignee. The document can be used to transfer specific identified intellectual property rights or a class of rights identified in respect of a defined work. Ireland—Intellectual property assignment—party-neutral This DEED is made on [insert date] Parties Check that the parties named in the contract are correct. If there is more than one company in a corporate group, take particular care to check that the company entering into the contract is the appropriate group entity. Parties 1 [insert name] [of OR a company incorporated under the laws of [Ireland] with company number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Assignor); and 2 [insert name] [of OR a company incorporated under the laws of [Ireland] with company number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Assignee) (each of the Assignor and the...

View the related q&as about Paris Convention

If a company proposes to launch a new product in Japan through a Japanese subsidiary and then to launch in other countries via other subsidiaries, can the parent company file the trade mark in Japan and then utilise the benefit of the Madrid Protocol? Would the Paris Convention provide better flexibility? What is the best solution to ensure that ownership remains with the parent company throughout the process?

If a company proposes to launch a new product in Japan through a Japanese subsidiary and then to launch in other countries via other subsidiaries, can the parent company file the trade mark in Japan and then utilise the benefit of the Madrid Protocol? Would the Paris Convention provide better flexibility? What is the best solution to ensure that ownership remains with the parent company throughout the process? In answering this Q&A we have limited our research to cover the Madrid Protocol and the Paris Convention. We are unable to give advice on Japanese trade mark law. The parent company can file the trade mark in Japan and utilise the benefit of the Madrid Protocol. For more information about the Madrid Protocol, see Practice Note: Madrid international trade mark system. The Paris Convention applies to applications filed directly in Japan or via the Madrid system and is therefore equally flexible within each system. What is the best solution to trade mark protection for the parent company depends...

View the related News about Paris Convention

EU Law weekly highlights—17 October 2024

This week's edition of EU Law weekly highlights includes an analysis of the Court of Justice decision that competitors are entitled to bring an injunction claim based on infringement of the EU GDPR and on the European Commission’s talks with individual Chinese EV makers on alternative to duties solutions. In addition, this week the Council of the EU has adopted its final position on the Cyber Resilience Act, updates to EU product liability rules, the Platform Work Directive, revisions to the EU CLP Regulation, a recast Directive of the Ambient Air Quality Directives, and a new designs protection legislation package. The Council has also agreed to extend the application timeline for the EU Deforestation Regulation and published its conclusions on the EU’s negotiating positions for COP29 and COP 16. Further this week, the European Securities and Markets Authority issued the first consolidated report on sanctions, and the European Medicines Agency opened a consultation on revisions to its policy on handling competing interests among scientific committee members and experts.

International Trade weekly highlights—17 October 2024

This week's edition of International Trade weekly highlights includes: analysis in the EU being ready to continue talks with individual Chinese EV makers on alternative-to-duties solutions, the UK and Switzerland resuming trade talks to upgrade free trade agreement, the Council of the EU ratifying a trade agreement with Columbia, Peru and Ecuador, China initiating a World Trade Organization dispute with Türkiye over measures on vehicle imports, Regulation on anti-dumping duty on imports of aluminium radiators originating in the People’s Republic of China, Regulation on provisional anti-dumping on imports originating in the People’s Republic of China published in Official Journal and Regulation on management of tariff quotas in the rice sector, cheese export for the US and an update for IMA1 Certificates for the import of dairy products from New Zealand being published in the Official Journal of the EU, and a weekly roundup of HMRC import, export and customs guidance.