Simon Stanes blogs for The IPKat on the Budweiser dispute
No items found.
January 1, 1970
Simon Stanes, the head of EIP Brands, has contributed to a post on The IPKat blog following a ruling by the General Court in what could be the end to the long-running Budweiser trademark dispute.
The decision concerned the battle between Anheuser-Busch and Budvar, various aspects of which have been covered in previous EIP newsflashes in August 2012, May 2011, and February 2011; and in an EIP-authored article for US journal Intellectual Property Counselor.
Simon’s post is a collaboration with The IPKat’s lead blogger Jeremy Phillips, and can be read here.
Recent Case Reports
Invalidity of juicer patent upheld on appeal
03 November 2026
The Court of Appeal upheld the invalidity of Hurom’s juicer patent for lack of inventive step, while clarifying the admissibility requirements for patent amendments and the use of the unamended description when construing amended claims. It also confirmed the UPC’s jurisdiction over infringement in Poland despite Poland not being a UPCA Contracting Member State, but found that Hurom had failed to establish infringement under Polish law.
Evidence preservation doesn’t stretch to interrogation
03 November 2026
The Court of Appeal confirmed that evidence-preservation orders may be granted ex parte where there is a demonstrable risk that evidence could be destroyed or become unavailable, and that such orders may extend to relevant commercial and promotional documents. However, Art. 60 UPCA does not permit a bailiff or expert to question the defendant’s personnel on substantive technical matters, which must instead be handled under the Court’s control.
UPC Court of Appeal clarifies claim construction, the role of party experts, and provisional measures in direct-competition cases
03 November 2026
The CoA’s decision of 30 April 2025 in Insulet v EOFlow provides important guidance on claim construction, the role of party-appointed experts and the requirements for provisional injunctions.