Alan Williams Entertainments Ltd & Anor v Hurd & Ors

Alan Williams Entertainments Ltd & Anor v Hurd & Ors

Clause 5 of the compromise agreement necessarily implied an obligation on the parties to use reasonable endeavours to prevent third parties with whom they deal from describing or promoting their bands as 'the Rubettes'; the defendants' website content infringed this obligation; and the trial judge's costs order was not wrong in principle and did not warrant appellate interference.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Alan Williams Entertainments Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Alan Williams; Defendant/appellant: William Hurd; Defendant/appellant: Alex Bines; Defendant/appellant: Paul Prewer (also known as Paul Da Vinci)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division on Liability and Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused on first and second grounds, appeal dismissed on third ground.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Passing Off, Trade Marks, Costs Orders
Contract Law Intellectual Property Implied Terms Passing Off Trade Marks Costs Orders

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

Parties

Alan Williams Entertainments Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Alan Williams

Claimant/respondent

William Hurd

Defendant/appellant

Alex Bines

Defendant/appellant

Paul Prewer (also known as Paul Da Vinci)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division on Liability and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 5 of the compromise agreement implied an obligation to use reasonable endeavours to prevent third parties from describing the band as 'the Rubettes'
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' website content infringed clause 5 of the compromise agreement
  3. 3 Whether the costs order made by the trial judge was wrong in principle

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 5 of the compromise agreement necessarily implied an obligation on the parties to use reasonable endeavours to prevent third parties with whom they deal from describing or promoting their bands as 'the Rubettes'; the defendants' website content infringed this obligation; and the trial judge's costs order was not wrong in principle and did not warrant appellate interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused on first and second grounds, appeal dismissed on third ground.

Orders

  • Unsuccessful appellant to pay the costs of the appeal and application for permission to appeal to the respondent.
  • Costs summarily assessed at £12,285, payable within 14 days.