The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. 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.
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are trying to water down a strongly centralised EU 'community patent' system that would grant jurisdiction over disputes to a new EU intellectual property court
The European Parliament's legal affairs committee is calling for national courts to be given the job. The move should dismay the European Commission, which has been seeking a simpler system to avoid conflicting national rulings marring an EU patent's uniform applicability across the EU. In amendments that will be tabled at the full parliament, the committee is proposing that central judgments should cover only appeals. Committee members are also tinkering with the proposed rule that the patent need be written in only one official EU language. MEPs voted to propose that a patent applicant should indicate a second "procedural" language from a choice of English, French, German, Italian and Spanish that would be acceptable for any legal proceedings. The system is supposed to be simpler than that for existing European patents, which are translated into the language of each member state where they are in force.