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:

Andy Millmore

Tel:
Work +44 207 7667 5153
Email:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Work Department

Litigation; intellectual property; advertising and marketing.

Position

Partner and head of litigation group. Large-scale litigation and emphasis on IP litigation and strategy, including patent issues as well as soft IP such as copyright, trade marks and brands. Clients include: Joltid (internet technology), Orange (trade mark disputes), Hat Trick Productions (various, including format protection), Trading Scents (cosmetics importers), Trade Mark Collections (branded merchandise), Direct Beauty Products and MWO (independent ad agency). Accredited mediator.

Career

Qualified Macfarlanes 1985; partner 1990-2000. Head elect of Litigation department and in charge of contentious IP. Millmores, IP litigation/ strategy boutique firm (sole practitioner) 2000-2004; 2004 merged with Harbottle & Lewis.

Languages

French, German and some Italian.

Member

INTA (parallel imports committee); ITMA (associate); Law Society.

Education

Hove County Grammar School for Boys; Peterhouse, Cambridge 1979-1982 (MA Law First Class Honours); College of Law, Guildford 1982-83 (Distinction).

Leisure

Sport, cinema, music.

Practice Areas

Intellectual property; Litigation - 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