YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATOR ON THE APPRENTICE 6: SOMEWHAT DOWN AT HEEL: “BASICALLY – ITS JUST A LOT OF FANCY BOLLOCKS FOR SOME SHOES”

Our lawyers have yet to the decent thing and get fired.   Both were in the losing team this week. Their entire team got called back in to get fired. Both survived. Their fancy high heeled shoe was beaten by a pink trainer that looked more appropriate for six year olds. But then again six year olds need trainers. Here we review how our lawyers are getting on. Look at guidance we got from Twitter and review a case that involved evidence from a “sneakerologist”

HOW ARE OUR LAWYERS DOING?

KURRAN

Kurran is a law graduate who wants to be an actor. No shame in that.  Benedict Cumberbatch wanted to be a barrister.  Acting, Benedict said,

“Acting is a very odd, peripatetic, crazed, out of your control work and social schedule.It’s very hard to plan a family life, yet alone know where the next pay cheque is coming from” (Actually Benedict you may have found the Bar quite familiar).

Back to our Apprentice, however, Kurran does not suffer from any lack of belief in his own abilities. Well, perhaps a bit. On arriving at a theatre he was definite “this is my task”. On hearing that the task was designing a woman’s shoe – he backtracked.  That didn’t stop him having a strong opinion on every thing that was going on, everything he didn’t agree with was wrong. “I think I’m quite a creative person”.  “I can see things other candidates can’t: they chose not to listen to me.

When asked why he couldn’t sell the shoe it was obviously because the “shoe was not good enough”.

Lord Sugar asked “what do you actually do?”  When he returned one of the flatmates asked why he had returned when “nobody does less than you”.

However Kurran has survived. Next week he is putting his creative and leadership skills towards marketing an airline. He will be project manager. Lets see if he can fly.

SARAH ANN

The difficulty with writing about Sarah Ann is that she has kept quiet. Fair does, she was the project manager last week and won the task. This week she made the (to my mind very sensible suggestion) that there should not be strips of wire retaining the foot in the shoe.  I have yet to see, however, any “laying down of the law in the boardroom” as promised.  Maybe that has yet to come.

HELP FROM TWITTER

Because of my lack of familiarity with the finer points of shoe design. I asked for assistance from Twitter. As you will see Leading Counsel was very “direct” in her assessment of the situation.

I need help with the technical terms

Basically- it’s quite a lot of fancy bollocks for just some shoes

 

They’ve gone to Clarke’s!!!! There is mention of a ‘comfy trainer!!! This is ‘Shoe hell”

Give me loafers or Doc Martens any day!

don’t ask me. tonight I am wearing £7.50 knock off not-converses that are covered in building dust…

SHOES AT LAW: EVIDENCE FROM A SNEAKEROLOGIST

  1. The design of shoes has been the subject matter of litigation in the courts.  Have a read of D Jacobson & Sons Ltd v Globe GB Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2008] EWHC 88 (Ch) a case about trainers. Mr Justice Etherton observed:-

The issue at the heart of these proceedings is an important one generally, and particularly in the context of the market for trainers. That market is vast. In the region of 52% of the general public purchase trainers at some time during the course of the year. It is common for trainers to bear designs and logos on their sides.” (In the light of this it is, perhaps, not surprising that the trainer won).

That case involved evidence from a  “sneakerologist”

  1. Matthew King (the self-confessed “sneakerologist”), for example, not only has a particularly passionate interest in trainers, as I have mentioned, but his evidence was that he remembered the Gola Wing Flash logo from when he was a child and more recently when he saw it on some of his friend’s trainers. His oral evidence was that he looks at the trainers on the feet of people he passes when walking, and that he would expect to recognise all the main brands of trainers sold in England.

  2. Darren King, a prolific purchaser of trainers, mistook the Globe Side Design for the Gola Wing Flash logo even though he had bought Gola trainers in the past. His evidence was that he could usually tell the difference between different brands of trainers by the logos they use on the side of trainers and he could recognise most of the main brands in that way. He himself had Gola shoes. His oral evidence in cross examination was that he would definitely say that the shoe he was shown was a Gola trainer looking at the side.”