Gladness (also known as Tumi) Jukic v British Broadcasting Corporation & Anor

Gladness (also known as Tumi) Jukic v British Broadcasting Corporation & Anor

The claimant's pleadings, even if amended, failed to disclose any legally recognisable cause of action for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, harassment, or computer misuse. The intellectual property claim was hopelessly vague and lacked sufficient similarity between the claimant's treatment and the Glow Up Show to support copyright infringement. The trademark claim failed due to invalidity. The harassment and computer misuse claims lacked legal foundation. The claim and summary judgment application were both totally without merit, warranting strike-out, summary judgment, indemnity costs, and a limited civil restraint order.

Parties
Claimant: Gladness (also known as Tumi) Jukic; First Defendant: British Broadcasting Corporation; Second Defendant: Wall to Wall Media Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property/civil / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Claim struck out and summary judgment granted for defendants; claimant's summary judgment application refused as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Trademark Cancellation, Harassment, Computer Misuse, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Costs, Civil Restraint Orders
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Copyright Infringement Trademark Cancellation Harassment Computer Misuse Summary Judgment Strike Out +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gladness (also known as Tumi) Jukic

Claimant

British Broadcasting Corporation

First Defendant

Wall to Wall Media Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property/civil / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's pleadings disclose any legally recognisable cause of action for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, harassment, or computer misuse
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out or summarily dismissed
  3. 3 Whether the defendants are entitled to indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's pleadings, even if amended, failed to disclose any legally recognisable cause of action for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, harassment, or computer misuse. The intellectual property claim was hopelessly vague and lacked sufficient similarity between the claimant's treatment and the Glow Up Show to support copyright infringement. The trademark claim failed due to invalidity. The harassment and computer misuse claims lacked legal foundation. The claim and summary judgment application were both totally without merit, warranting strike-out, summary judgment, indemnity costs, and a limited civil restraint order.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out and summary judgment granted for defendants; claimant's summary judgment application refused as totally without merit.

Orders

  • Claim struck out against both defendants
  • Summary judgment entered for defendants