How many times has [2004] RPC 34 been cited?

[2004] RPC 34 is cited by 3 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2004] RPC 34

· cited by 3 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[2004] RPC 34

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 3

Cited — Sastry & Anor v General Medical Council 2021-04-30
“…mm) 97, para 129; Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (trading as Washington DC) [2000] 1 WLR 2416, para 129; Buchanan v Alba Diagnostics Ltd [2004] RPC 34, para 31.…”
Cited — General Medical Council v Hayat 2018-12-13
“…9]; Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (trading as Washington DC) [2001] FSR 11 (HL) at [29]; Buchanan v Alba Diagnostics Ltd [2004] UKHL 5, [2004] RPC 34 at [31]. As the authorities show, the addition of "plainly" or "clearly" to the word "wrong" adds nothing in this context.”…”
Cited — Bawa-Garba v The General Medical Council & Ors 2018-08-13
“…9]; Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (trading as Washington DC) [2001] FSR 11 (HL) at [29]; Buchanan v Alba Diagnostics Ltd [2004] UKHL 5, [2004] RPC 34 at [31].As the authorities show, the addition of “plainly” or “clearly” to the word “wrong” adds nothing in this context.…”