Posts

Showing posts with the label due cause

Lord Justice Arnold's Guidance on Trade Mark Law in the Lidl v Tesco Appeal

Image
Sir Richard Arnold Author Dakej2point3   Licence CC BY-SA 4.0  Deed   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Lewison, Arnold and Birss) Lidl Great Britain Ltd and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and Anothe r (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 262 (19 March 2024) Yesterday I discussed the Court of Appeal's judgment in  Lidl Great Britain Ltd and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and Anothe r  (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 262 (19 March 2024) in Trade Marks - The Appeal in Lidl v Tesco .  I explained that Lord Justice Arnold had delivered the lead judgment which consisted of 196 paragraphs.  He set out the grounds of the appeal by Tesco Stores Ltd and Tesco Plc ("Tesco") against Mrs Justice Joanna Smith's findings on trade mark infringement and passing off at para [122] and its grounds of appeal against her findings on copyright infringement at para [188]. Paras [123] to [161] addressed the appeal against the judge's findings on passing off, para...

Trade Marks - The Appeal in Lidl v Tesco

Image
  Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Lewison, Arnold and Birss) Lidl Great Britain Ltd and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and Anothe r (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 262 (19 March 2024) In  Lidl Great Britain Limited and another v Tesco Stores Ltd and another [ 2023] EWHC 873 (Ch) (19 April 2023), Mrs Justice Joanna Smith held that Tesco Stores Ltd and Tesco Plc ("Tesco") were liable to  Lidl Great Britain Ltd and Lidl Stiftung & Co KG ("Lidl") for trade mark and copyright infringement and passing off . She also found for Tesco on part of their counterclaim for invalidation of several of Lidl's marks.  I discussed that judgment in  Trade Marks - Lidl v Tesco   on 1 May 2023 and a further judgment in  Discretion in Awarding Final Injunctions- Lidl v Tesco  on 29 June 2023. The Appeal Tesco appealed against the finding of trade mark and copyright infringement and passing off and Lidl against the invalidation of their marks,  The app...

Who's Pink - Thomas Pink or Victoria's Secret?

Image
In Thomas Pink Limited v Victoria's Secret UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 2631 (Ch) (31 July 2014) Mr Justice Birss had to resolve a dispute between two well known retailers. The claimant was Thomas Pink  which had started life as a specialist shirt maker in Jeremyn Street. It is now part of the LVMH Group  the interests of which range from champagne to fashion. The defendant was  Victoria's Secret UK  which is best known for its bras and knickers  particularly in the US where it began. Both retailers are diversifying their businesses.  Thomas Pink's website has a section for "Women" after "New Collection", "Men", "Shirts", "Ties" and "Accessories" while Victoria's Secret is moving into women's clothing generally. The Dispute The battle arose over the right to use the word "Pink" as a brand. According to Wikipedia  the claimant was named after Thomas Pink, an 18th-century tailor, who made the h...

"What is meant by "Due Cause" in s.10 (3) of the Trade Marks Act? The Red Bull Case

Image
Amsterdam   Source Wikipedia According to Wikipedia  Red Bull is the most popular energy drink in the world, with 5.2 billion cans sold in 2012. Its manufacturer, Red Bull GmbH , has registered the RED BULL mark has registered those words and their accompanying logo as word and device marks in trade mark registries around the world including the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property ( "BOIP" ) . The company registered that sign with BOIP for non-alcoholic drinks in class 32 with effect from 11 July 1983. After decades of massive sales and extensive advertising nobody could argue that that mark has a reputation within the meaning of art 5 (2) of the Trade Marks Directive (Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 October 2008   to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks OJ 8.11.2008 p 299/25).  S.10 (3) of our Trade Marks Act 1994   implements that provision. There is in the Net...