The London Taxi Corporation Ltd (t/a the London Taxi Company) v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 1840 (Ch) (03 July 2015)

The London Taxi Corporation Ltd (t/a the London Taxi Company) v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 1840 (Ch) (03 July 2015)

The application was refused because the proposed survey evidence was not likely to be of real value to the determination of the central issue of deception in the passing off claim. The survey was found to be fatally flawed due to leading questions, artificiality in the show materials, and failure to replicate real-world conditions. The cost of the survey was not justified by its likely utility, and the judge was capable of assessing the likelihood of deception without such evidence.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1840 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The London Taxi Corporation Limited (trading as The London Taxi Company); First Defendant: Frazer-Nash Research Limited; Second Defendant: Ecotive Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Passing Off and Trade Mark Infringement / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Adduce Survey Evidence
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Trade Mark Infringement, Admissibility of Survey Evidence, Cost Benefit Analysis in Evidence, Whitford Guidelines
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Passing Off Trade Mark Infringement Admissibility of Survey Evidence Cost Benefit Analysis in Evidence Whitford Guidelines

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The London Taxi Corporation Limited (trading as The London Taxi Company)

Claimant

Frazer-Nash Research Limited

First Defendant

Ecotive Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Passing Off and Trade Mark Infringement / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Adduce Survey Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be permitted to adduce survey evidence and evidence from survey respondents in support of its passing off claim
  2. 2 Whether the proposed survey evidence is of 'real value' and justifies the cost under the principles established in Interflora and Zeebox
  3. 3 Whether the survey complies with the Whitford Guidelines, particularly regarding leading questions and replicating real-world conditions

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the proposed survey evidence was not likely to be of real value to the determination of the central issue of deception in the passing off claim. The survey was found to be fatally flawed due to leading questions, artificiality in the show materials, and failure to replicate real-world conditions. The cost of the survey was not justified by its likely utility, and the judge was capable of assessing the likelihood of deception without such evidence.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Permission to adduce survey evidence and evidence from survey respondents is refused.