Trade law Part 19

Hungary Sup. Ct. 28 March 2007 Jurisdiction of national authorities/courts to cancel appellations of origin registered for other countries under Lisbon Agreement – Subject-matter of appellation of origin – Beer – Question whether place name is official name in relevant national language or name otherwise capable of indicating geographical origin – Relevance to eligibility of indication of origin for protection – Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and Their International Registration, Art. 2; Hungarian Trade Mark Law, Sec. 118 – Pfv.IV.21.153/2006/7 and Pfv.IV.21.165/2006/8 – Anheuser Busch Inc. v. Budéjovicky Budvar – “Budweis Beer”
International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law
Volume 40, Number 3, 2009 p.357

Advances and halts in the recent case-law of the Court of First Instance concerning the Community trade mark
Giuseppe Bertoli
ERA Forum
Volume 9, Number 4, April 2009 p.609-626

Is Lisbon the answer or the anathema to EC Trade law and policy?
Rafael Leal-Arcas
International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry
Volume 2, Issue 2, 2009 p.125-146

Local Government Law – Preemption – Southern District of New York Holds that New York City Hybrid Taxi Regulations Are Likely Preempted by the EPCA.. – Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. City of New York, No. 08 Civ.. 7837 (PAC), 2008 WL 4866021 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2008)
Harvard Law Review
Volume 122, Number 8, June 2009 p.2275

United Nations Commission on International trade law (UNCITRAL) / Commission des Nations Unies pour le droit commercial international (CNUDCI)
Uniform Law Review
Volume 13, Number 3, 2008 p.792

Quo vadis? Towards an effective predatory pricing provision
Garth Campbell
Trade Practices Law Journal
Volume 17, Number 2, June 2009 p.82

The level of criticism directed at s 46 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for its inability to capture predatory pricing indicates that smaller businesses are extremely concerned about this practice. Such criticism reached its peak following the High Court’s decision in Boral Besser Masonry Ltd v ACCC (2003) 215 CLR 374, which rejected a claim of predatory pricing. Since then, the Birdsville Amendment and other recent amendments to s 46 have attempted to more effectively capture predatory pricing by defining it more accurately. However, it remains to be seen whether these amendments will be successful. This article assesses the application and effectiveness of the Birdsville Amendment by applying it to the facts of the Boral decision, in effect, re-deciding the case on the current law, and attempts to define the characteristics of a truly effective predatory pricing provision.

The European Court of Justice on External Parallel Trade: Interpreting the Law or Constructing an Implied Trade Mark Infringement
Yona Marinova
Intellectual Property Quarterly
Number 2, 2009 p.254

Shadow Unilateralism: Enforcing International trade law at the WTO
Rachel Brewster
University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law
Volume 30, Number 4, Summer 2009 p.1133

Spanish Law 53/2007 on Control of External Trade in Defence and Dual-Use Material
Carlos Espaliú Berdud
Spanish Yearbook of International Law
Volume 13, 2007 p.1

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

International trade law, Trade law.