header-logo header-logo

25 May 2017
Issue: 7747 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

SMEs get tough about IP

Intellectual property has become a hot topic for small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs), with a 68% rise in legal proceedings.

According to law firm Hugh James, which has researched the subject, businesses are becoming more exposed to the risk of intellectual property theft as they move to online platforms. Original designs, images and video content can easily be reproduced or stolen from websites, causing damage to the business owner’s brand.

This has led to a sizeable increase in court proceedings launched to protect intellectual property.

A record 339 claims were heard by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) in 2016, up from 202 in 2015. IPEC streamlines procedures to help businesses reach a speedy conclusion. It handles small business claims worth up to £500,000 and caps costs recoverable from the losing side at £50,000.

Hugh James said this cost-effectiveness makes IPEC more accessible to SMEs, giving them greater confidence to bring a claim. It said businesses are also increasingly able to leverage the value of their intellectual property to secure funding for investment, which gives them an incentive both to take pre-emptive action and to enforce any infringement.

Tracey Singlehurst-Ward, Hugh James partner, said: ‘While previously a business’s most valuable asset tended to be physical it is more often than not now found in some intangible intellectual property.

‘That could be patents, designs, trademarks and goodwill in their brands or other works attracting copyright.

‘We no longer have an economy focused in manufacturing, but rather have a fast pace technology sector driven to reach the next intellectual creation first. Failure to invest at a small cost early on or take steps to protect what you have can cost SMEs dearly later down the line.’

Issue: 7747 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll