News 2026

Article: July 2026

Article: The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, July 2026

In the UK, the new Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 (‘Clinical Trials Regulations 2025’) took effect on 28th April 2026. This article provides a summary of the some of the key changes brought about by the Clinical Trials Regulations 2025, writes Dr Rosanna Cooper.

Current Regulation of Clinical Trials of Investigational Medicinal Products (‘CTIMPs’)

Until 27 April 2026, CTIMPs were regulated by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004.

Jurisdictions

The Clinical Trials Regulations 2025 are applicable to all of the UK comprising England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

In force

The Clinical Trials Regulations 2025 regulate clinical trials conducted in the UK involving CTIMPs; and all clinical trials carried out in the UK must be compliant with the Clinical Trials Regulations 2025.

Learn More

Case Study June 2026

Case study: Final year chemistry student accused of plagiarism - Use of AI – Disciplinary Proceedings - RT Coopers drafted statement and advised client – Allegation dismissed after Disciplinary Committee Hearing

A final year BSc (Hons) student studying Chemistry (‘our client’) accused of suspected plagiarism in a literature review due to improper referencing. The literature review was for a final year chemistry project. The department did not mark the literature review due to alleged academic misconduct. Our client had a previous academic misconduct offence from the commencement of university. The university treats a prior offence combined with an alleged offence as serious. Therefore, as this was potentially a second offence, the university classed this suspected offence as a serious offence. Our client was facing exclusion with no award due to the seriousness of the alleged offence. Before instructing RT Coopers, our client had attended an Academic Integrity meeting denying academic misconduct. By the time RT Coopers were instructed to assist, our client had been advised by lawyers who had drafted a statement and advised our client on the responses for the investigative meeting. The investigative panel referred the case to a disciplinary committee. Our client now had to attend a disciplinary hearing before the committee.

Concerned

Our client came to us concerned about the outcome of the investigation stage and the likely outcome of the case as the case was referred to a disciplinary committee although a set of lawyers were instructed at the time and drafted the statement for the investigative panel.

Grounds for the Statement

RT Coopers drafted the statement for the disciplinary committee. The statement included the mitigating circumstances of our client and procedural irregularities that were identified by RT Coopers.

Learn More

Article - March 2026

GB Trade Mark in Opposition Proceedings Before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) Post Brexit. In a Recent Trade Mark Case, the CJEU Clarifies the Procedures for a GB Trade Mark in EU Trade Mark Opposition Proceedings Post Brexit, written by Dr Rosanna Cooper and Daniella Corbin.

Case Summary

The recent case of EUIPO v Nowhere Co. Ltd (2026) (‘Nowhere’), concerned the validity of EUIPO opposition proceedings founded on earlier UK trade mark rights which have ceased to exist. The CJEU ruled on the implications of Brexit on earlier UK rights and EUIPO opposition proceedings brought prior to Brexit. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that ‘…UK trade mark rights cannot be relied on in European trade mark opposition proceedings commenced before Brexit…’ unless the owner can show those rights continued to exist and be enforceable in one or more EU member states after the UK left the EU.

In the case of Nowhere, the grounds for the opposition relied solely on UK trade mark rights which ceased to have EU territorial effect after Brexit. Accordingly, the opposition by Nowhere failed and the EUIPOs decision was upheld.

Trade Mark Opposition

…Trade Mark Opposition Proceedings Under GB law, a trade mark may protect distinctive signs such as names, logos, slogans shapes or even unique distinctive sounds. It is important for trade marks to be registered as exclusive rights are granted to use registered trade marks in respect of specified goods and/or services. The registered trade marks prevent third parties from using identical and/or similar signs in the course of trade. Once registered, registration affords a broader and enforceable protection to registered proprietors. Registered trade mark rights are therefore enforceable…

CJEU Ruling

The CJEU therefore concluded that GB rights could no longer be relied upon in pending EU opposition proceedings after the transition period had ended as they no longer conferred a right capable of being enforced within the EU.

Learn More

Daniella Corbin

Review - Doctor - January 2026

RT Coopers advised Medical Student Now a Doctor

'Dr. Cooper truly changed my life. She cares in a way that’s incredibly rare, and her guidance has had a profound impact on who I am and what I’m able to accomplish today. Her support gave me the confidence and direction to move forward, and I wouldn’t be where I am without her. There are no words to fully express my gratitude for someone who invests so deeply in the people she helps.’ PS