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.
One of the first judgments to tackle a dispute over the registering of Internet domain names has failed to set a precedent, according to a lawyer involved in the case.
In the High Court last month, the Vice-Chancellor Sir Richard Scott refused to grant an injunction to prevent Pitman Publishing using the name "pitman.co.uk".
A second company, Pitman Training, which used to be in the same group as Pitman Publishing, applied for the injunction on the grounds that its rival had no right to use the name Pitman in its address.
Although Pitman Publishing registered "pitman.co.uk" first, the name was accidentally transferred to a franchisee of Pitman Training when it registered the same name with the Internet's naming committee. When the mistake was realised, the domain name was transferred back to Pitman Publishing.
Scott ruled that, as both companies had a legitimate right to use the name Pitman, the injunction could not be justified.
Dawn Osborne, of Willoughby and Partners, which represented Pitman Publishing, said the judgment had not clarified the current debate over whether or not there was a "first come, first served" rule for Internet addresses.
She said: "The ruling does not mean that a passing off claim will never succeed against someone who has registered first, if that person does not have a legitimate right to use of the name."