Advertising & Marketing Disputes
Lewis Silkin’s disputes team have years of unsurpassed experience in all types of advertising & marketing disputes, acting for advertisers, agencies, production companies and media owners.
Our experience includes:
- making and defending ASA and other regulatory challenges through judicial review when necessary
- bringing and defending competitor complaints particularly in relation to comparative advertising
- dealing with consumer claims and trading standards’ investigations
- disputes over plagiarism and other IP infringements and defamation
- fallings out between advertisers and agencies over service or transparency issues
- contractual claims involving the production and dissemination of advertising and marketing materials
We also have expertise in relation to digital, online and social media advertising which often involves cutting-edge data protection, privacy and regulatory issues. In addition, we are often involved in employment, corporate and real estate related disputes in the advertising & marketing sectors, such as employee and discrimination claims, shareholder and SPA warranty matters and issues over property leases or planning permissions for advertising sites.
Service of a claim form on an agent - was it valid?22 June 2017
In a recent case the High Court considered as a preliminary issue whether a claimant had validly served a claim form on what they considered was the agent of the claimant. The rules of service require that the defendant must be served at the place within the jurisdiction where it conducts business, or where it carries on its activities and which has a real connection with the claim. Therefore the question here was whether the agent’s office was a place at which the defendant conducted its business, or where it carried on its activities?
Mediation14 June 2017
Mediation is a common method of alternative dispute resolution (‘ADR’). It is a consensual process, with any settlement having to be agreed by both parties.
Disclosure: avoiding the pitfalls22 May 2017
This guide provides you with a general introduction to the obligations of disclosure in Court proceedings. The rules governing disclosure are found in the Civil Procedure Rules Part 31 and the surrounding case law. This guide will highlight the main points you need to know, consider the problems often encountered and offer some practical tips.
Jurisdiction Challenges22 May 2017
Where a claim is litigated can be very important. This inbrief provides you with a guide on how to challenge the jurisdiction of the English courts if a claim is started here. We also highlight the steps that can be taken in England if a claim is commenced elsewhere, even though you believe it should be litigated or arbitrated in England.
Marathon Asset misses the jackpot again12 April 2017
After being awarded only £2 in nominal damages in its breach of confidence case, Marathon Asset has been heavily penalised on costs after failing to accept the defendants’ Part 36 offer.
Expert Witnesses16 March 2017
This guide provides a general introduction to the use of experts in court proceedings. The rules governing expert evidence are found in Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Practice Direction 35, the Court Guides and the Guidance for Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims published by the Civil Justice Council. This guidance will highlight the main points you need to know, consider issues often encountered and offer some practical tips.
Court considers service of a defendant’s notice to force claimant to serve proceedings or discontinue a claim14 February 2017
A recent decision not only reminds practitioners of a defendant’s ability to force a claimant to either serve proceedings or discontinue a claim by using a CPR 7.7(1) notice, but also considers for the first time the date for compliance with such a notice.
Legal advice privilege: Not as wide as you think?08 February 2017
Who is a lawyer’s client and what type of communications are protected for the purposes of legal advice privilege have been the subject of two recent important High Court decisions. These cases make it clear that not all communications between lawyers and a client’s employees will be protected by legal advice privilege, even if the communication took place to allow legal advice to be given.