One Response
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 16.8K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- MAZUR MATTERS 45: COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON 24th FEBRUARY 2026
- WHEN THE WITNESS STATEMENT OF THE DEFENDANT CONTAINS PASSAGES THAT ARE CUT AND PASTED FROM AN EXPERT’S REPORT: SOMEONE MAY NOTICE THIS…
- REVIEW OF THE YEAR 7: STATEMENTS OF CASE ON THIS BLOG: MATTERS OF THE PLEADING OBVIOUS
- COST BITES 320: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO SEEK A FURTHER INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS: “I THINK IT CONSIDERABLY UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS POINT HAS BEEN TAKEN”
- REVIEW OF THE YEAR 6: EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025: CASES ON THIS BLOG
Top Posts
- COST BITES 320: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO SEEK A FURTHER INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS: "I THINK IT CONSIDERABLY UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS POINT HAS BEEN TAKEN"
- MAZUR MATTERS 45: COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON 24th FEBRUARY 2026
- WHEN THE WITNESS STATEMENT OF THE DEFENDANT CONTAINS PASSAGES THAT ARE CUT AND PASTED FROM AN EXPERT'S REPORT: SOMEONE MAY NOTICE THIS...
- REVIEW OF THE YEAR 6: EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025: CASES ON THIS BLOG
- REVIEW OF THE YEAR 7: STATEMENTS OF CASE ON THIS BLOG: MATTERS OF THE PLEADING OBVIOUS
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
Copyright
© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025.
Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
I am glad I am not an IP lawyer!
To my untutored ear the “oh why oh why oh why” bit of each song sounds very similar, but otherwise these are different songs. But possibly the “oh why” bit is the real earworm, for whatever that may be worth.
I do wonder why Sheeran chose to initiate proceedings for a declaration of non-infringement. Perhaps to gain jurisdiction and avoid an infringement claim against him being heard elsewhere?