The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Mr Justice Kitchin has ruled that Harry Potter author JK Rowling and her publishing house Bloomsbury should face claims for copyright infringement in the High Court.
In rejecting the defendants’ application for summary judgment to dismiss the case, Kitchin J ruled that the claim had a chance of success although it was “improbable”. If the case goes to trial the claimant, Paul Allen, may have to provide security for costs, it was ruled.
DMH Stallard partner Nick Kounoupias instructed Blackstone Chambers’ Robert Howe QC to represent Allen in his claim against the author and publishing house.
The trustees of the estate of the late Adrian Jacobs, of which Allen is one, claim that themes from Jacobs’ 1987 book The Adventures of Willy the Wizard are copied in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, which was published in 2000, and allege that Rowling therefore has infringed copyright.
At a High Court hearing in July, 8 New Square’s John Baldwin QC, instructed by Schillings partner Gideon Benaim for JK Rowling, slammed the claim for lacking any merit. He described the claim as “absurd” and “a disgrace” and requested it be thrown out.