The Legal 500

HANOVER HOUSE, 14 HANOVER SQUARE, LONDON, W1S 1HP, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 020 7667 5000
Fax:
Fax 020 7667 5100
DX:
44617 MAYFAIR
Web:
www.harbottle.com
Email:

Colin Howes

Tel:
Work +44 20 7667 5000
Email:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Work Department

Company and commercial group

Position

Head of company commercial group; provides strategic and corporate advice primarily for clients in the media/entertainment, aviation and leisure industries; recent deals he has worked on include Virgin Holidays’ acquisition of cruise specialists Fast Track; the sale of TV producer Objective to All3Media; Acuity Capital’s investment in TV distributor/producer Target Entertainment; and Target’s subsequent acquisitions of Minotaur and Greenlit.

Career

Articled Harbottle & Lewis; qualified 1981; partner 1984; managing partner 1992-2000; trustee of Comic Relief since 1984.

Languages

French.

Member

European Air Law Association.

Education

Ipswich School; Oriel College, Oxford (1978 MA English).

Leisure

Theatre, cinema, music.

Practice Areas

Aviation; Corporate and commercial; Media and entertainment

Back to index

Legal Developments by:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

  • Account of profits v damages: when and why does it matter?

    Since 2007, Experience Hendrix LLC(Hendrix) and Times Newspapers Ltd (Times) have been litigating over the intellectual property rights (IPR) in a recording of a Jimi Hendrix concert that took place at the Royal Albert Hall in February 1969. In September 2006 Times distributed a free CD, or covermount, with each edition of The Sunday Times . A claim was issued against Times in March 2007 for infringement of copyright and performers’ rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. In March 2008 the High Court held that Times had infringed the IPR in the recording and Hendrix elected to have an inquiry as to damages in respect of that infringement. The case has given rise to some complex issues as to the basis for the quantification of damages, and the inquiry is due to be heard next year, but the case is also a reminder of more general considerations in relation to remedies in IPR cases, and why the basis for quantification of those remedies can have far reaching consequences for a successful claimant.

    - Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to