The Lawyer Global Litigation Top 50 report is the only ranking of international law firms by litigation and arbitration revenue and is essential reading for anyone seeking to benchmark their litigation and dispute resolution practices...
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.
AS the beef war brings out a flurry of anti-European headlines, two publications are fighting in the courts to be the true European.
The 'what's-in-a-name' battle between the The European and The Economist is far from over. Earlier this year, in the High Court's Chancery Division, Mr Justice Rattee threw out The European's claim that The Economist's new publication, European Voice, breached its trade mark.
But The European is to appeal, seeking an order to force The Economist to change its new publication's name.
In the High Court ruling, Mr Justice Rattee said the only similarity between the two publications was the word 'European' and he did not consider there was a likelihood of confusion between the two.
He said The European was a weekly colour broadsheet aimed at the general public, but European Voice was a black and white weekly tabloid aimed at people who work for institutions in the EU. And he said there were "significant differences" in the mastheads of the two papers.
The European's registered trade mark was in upper case letters and incorporated a dove of peace, whereas European Voice's masthead was in lower case and had a star over it. During the hearing, an all-star cast of Fleet Street's top brass was called to give evidence.
Charles Wilson, former editor of The Times and Sir David English, chair of Associated Newspapers, were called by The European, and European Voice called current editor of The Times Peter Stothard and the former editor-in-chief of The Guardian and the Observer, Peter Preston.
But the judge said he had not found their evidence of assistance as it was clear to him that equally eminent and experienced people from the media took different views on the matter.
In rejecting the claim, he said his own view was that The European and European Voice were not similar in any way that could be said to create a likelihood of confusion.