When Apple posted a statement on its website earlier this month, admitting that Samsung had not copied its iPad design, the company thought it had been very clever with its wording – complying with the demand but also taking the opportunity to attack its rival once again.

Yesterday though, Apple was hauled back in front of the judges, who made it perfectly clear they were not amused by the firm’s antics, ordering them to rewrite the statement and publish it again in just 48 hours.

The ruling comes after Samsung complained that Apple’s statement did not comply with the court’s original order – a complaint that judges quickly upheld.

QC Michael Beloff, representing Apple, said that the firm would comply with the order and remove the original statement immediately. However, he then stunned the judges by asking for two weeks to write a new statement – a request that was immediately denied.

Addressing Mr. Beloff, Lord Justice Longmore said that he was: “Just amazed that you cannot put the right notice up at the same time as you take the other one down.”

A second judge, Sir Robin Jacob, was equally astonished, adding with a hint of sarcasm that: “I would like to see the head of Apple [Tim Cook] make an affidavit about why that is such a technical difficulty for the Apple company.”

Samsung had earlier complained to the judges that Apple’s original statement, which came in the wake of a ruling that the Korean firm’s Galaxy tablet had not copied Apple’s iPad design, was “inaccurate and misleading”. The statement by Apple briefly admitted that the UK courts had ruled against them, but then went on to add how other judgments in Germany and the US had gone their way.

Samsung claimed that the statement would only add to the confusion and uncertainty regarding its entitlement to market the Galaxy Tab, adding that it had created an impression that “UK courts are out of step with other courts”.

Sir Robin Jacob made it perfectly clear to Apple why the statement was necessary, and how it should be worded:

“A consumer might well think: ‘I had better not buy a Samsung – maybe it’s illegal and if I buy one it may not be supported’”

“Apple itself must (having created the confusion) make the position clear: that it acknowledges that the court has decided that that these Samsung products do not infringe its registered design.

“The acknowledgement must come from the horse’s mouth.”

Apple now has until Saturday to come up with a re-worded statement making the facts clear.