West (t/a Eastenders) v Smith & Turner Plc

West (t/a Eastenders) v Smith & Turner Plc

The judge erred in principle by making no order as to costs; costs must be allocated proportionally based on the issues won, with Fullers entitled to the majority of costs due to success on the distinctiveness issue.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: David West t/a Eastenders; Defendant/respondent: Fuller Smith & Turner PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Appeal
Outcome
Appeal on costs allowed; costs reallocated.
Legal Topics
Costs, Trade Marks, Distinctiveness, Non Use
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Costs Trade Marks Distinctiveness Non Use

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

Parties

David West t/a Eastenders

Claimant/appellant

Fuller Smith & Turner PLC

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper allocation of costs between parties based on success on distinct issues
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in principle in making no order as to costs
  3. 3 Application of CPR 44.3 to costs allocation

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in principle by making no order as to costs; costs must be allocated proportionally based on the issues won, with Fullers entitled to the majority of costs due to success on the distinctiveness issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal on costs allowed; costs reallocated.

Orders

  • Fullers to recover 80 per cent of their costs at trial.
  • Costs of three reserved interlocutory applications included as costs in the case.