Maier & Anor v Asos Plc & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 377 (22 April 2015)

Maier & Anor v Asos Plc & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 377 (22 April 2015)

It is not appropriate to require undertakings or declarations from Asos as they were not sought in the appeal; Assos is not entitled to liberty to apply regarding own name defence; Asos is the overall winner and entitled to 65% of its costs of the appeal; Asos must repay £100,000 of trial costs plus interest; Assos must pay £50,000 on account of costs; permission to appeal to Supreme Court is refused; no reference to Court of Justice is necessary.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 377
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Roger Maier; Appellant/claimant: Assos of Switzerland SA; Respondent/defendant: ASOS plc; Respondent/defendant: ASOS.com Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Intellectual Property, Community Trade Mark Court) / Post Appeal Judgment Addressing Outstanding Matters
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; costs orders adjusted; permission to appeal refused; no undertakings or declarations granted.
Legal Topics
Community Trade Mark, Own Name Defence, Infringement, Invalidity, Costs
Intellectual Property Trademark Law Community Trade Mark Own Name Defence Infringement Invalidity Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roger Maier

Appellant/claimant

Assos of Switzerland SA

Appellant/claimant

ASOS plc

Respondent/defendant

ASOS.com Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Intellectual Property, Community Trade Mark Court) / Post Appeal Judgment Addressing Outstanding Matters

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether undertakings should be required from Asos regarding keyword bidding, product description, and logo changes
  2. 2 Whether declarations as to infringement and invalidity should be made
  3. 3 Costs allocation following appeal outcome

Ratio Decidendi

It is not appropriate to require undertakings or declarations from Asos as they were not sought in the appeal; Assos is not entitled to liberty to apply regarding own name defence; Asos is the overall winner and entitled to 65% of its costs of the appeal; Asos must repay £100,000 of trial costs plus interest; Assos must pay £50,000 on account of costs; permission to appeal to Supreme Court is refused; no reference to Court of Justice is necessary.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; costs orders adjusted; permission to appeal refused; no undertakings or declarations granted.

Orders

  • Asos awarded 65% of its costs of the appeal.
  • Asos to repay £100,000 of trial costs plus interest.