Ruling from IPEC calls for less of a bracket: General Civil Restraint Order granted against serial litigator
Civil restraint orders (CVOs) prevent individuals from bringing claims or applications which are without merit. CVOs commonly require their subject to obtain court permission before further claims or applications relating to a particular cause of action (i.e. a claim for patent infringement) can be issued. In Perry v FH Brundle & Ors  EWHC 678 (IPEC), the court granted a 'general' CVO which restricts Mr Perry not only from bringing claims relating to a particular cause of action (an alleged infringement of his patent), but goes significantly further and restricts him from filing any claim or application in court without permission at all.
In the recent decision of Phonographic Performance Ltd v Hagan t/a The Brent Tavern & Ors  EWHC 3076 (IPEC), HHJ Hacon in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) held that neither the stage costs, as set out in Table A in Section IV of Practice Direction 45, nor the overall cost cap set out in CPR 45.31(1), displace the rules relating to Part 36 Offers.
In a recent UK unregistered design right (UDR) decision the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) found UDRs in the design of a locker (and the designs in parts of the locker) had been infringed by a competitor's locker and its parts. This is an important procedural decision as the IPEC has indicated a preference for design charts in UDR cases.