8 NEW SQUARE

020 7405 4321

Mark Platts-Mills QC

 


Year of call: 1975
Year of silk: 1995

After reading engineering and economics at Balliol College, Oxford, Mark Platts-Mills QC joined the pre-eminent patent and intellectual property set at the time, the Chambers of Mr. Thomas Blanco White at Francis Taylor Building. He has since specialised in all aspects of intellectual property including patents, trade marks, passing off, registered designs, copyright, design right, technical trade secrets and commercial matters with a technical content. Mark was characterised as a “real fighter” in Chambers Directory 2010 and indeed, Ultraframe v Eurocell is prominent among his recent highlights as one of very few fully fought out inquiries as to damages in a patent action. He has also recently represented the applicant for revocation of a UK patent which, if upheld, would have covered the ubiquitous USB memory stick (Trek v MSystems). In other highlights, Mark appeared for the defendant in the leading database right case (British Horse Racing Board v William Hill), and for the claimant in a successful trade mark infringement trial concerning tree shaped air fresheners (Julius Samann v Tetrosyl). In addition, he successfully represented the defendant in a design rights case relating to helmets for the rescue services (Helmet Integrated Systems v Mitchell Tunnard). He is currently representing the claimants in the trade secrets case Vestergaard Frandsen v Bestnet.

Clients can expect to benefit from Mark’s long experience encompassing an extremely diverse range of cases, which has given him a lasting appetite for the most challenging of disputes.

Other

O2 v H3G (2004/2005)

Representing Hutchison at the interim stage of this dispute, with James Abrahams. This was a comparative advertising case in which O2 sought to restrain by interim injunction advertisements placed by "3" in which they suggested that certain of their services were substantially cheaper than comparative services of O2. The Court, Pumfrey J, held that on the current state of evidence the advertisements were not misleading and declined to grant an injunction. He found arguable, and left open, the question whether the use of bubbles by "3" might constitute infringement of certain O2 bubbles trade marks despite the fact that the advertisement was a comparative advertisement. O2 subsequently applied to refer a raft of questions relating to issues arising under the Trade Marks Directive to the European Court of Justice. The application was refused by the Vice Chancellor.

Jordan Grand Prix v Tiger Telematics (2004/2005)

The Defendant which launched its new "Gizmondo" product in October 2004 entered into sponsorship agreements with the Jordan Formula One team. In March 2004 the Claimant sought summary judgment in respect of alleged breach of contract by failure to pay the fees due of US$3m. The Defendant alleged, amongst other matters, that the contracts had been induced by misrepresentations by Jordan staff. Jordan failed to obtain summary Judgment but persuaded the Court to order payment of US$2.5m into Court. The sum to be paid was reduced on appeal and provision was made for security to be provided by means of shares in the Defendant company. The case was settled shortly before trial.

Kangol Ltd v Sports World International Ltd. (2004)

Kangol sought an interim injunction to prevent the sale by the Defendant of £9.7 million worth of Kangol branded casual wear through its shops, which include Lillywhites. Kangol contended that the goods were "counterfeit". The substantive issue was whether such goods and the manner in which they had been produced and imported fell within the terms of a licence granted by Kangol to a third party. Apart from one design the Claimant failed.

ReadingFestival Ltd v Coors Brewers Ltd. (2003)

Successfully opposed an application by the Mean Fiddler Group to prevent the Carling Group from promoting and issuing a CD of tracks by bands appearing on the Carling Stage at the Reading and Leeds festivals under the title “Best of the Fest” and by reference to various festival logos.

  • What the Directories Say
  • "He is phenomenal at cross-examination; equally charming and ruthless in his line of questioning."
    Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2017

    "Adept in all areas of IP"
    Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2016

    "Formidable in court"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2016

    "Recommended for all aspects of IP law."
    Legal 500 (Intellectual Property) 2015

    " Head of chambers, he brings an impressive amount of experience to cases." " Highly versatile and a good street fighter"
    Chambers & Partners (Intellectual Property) 2015