Woolley & Anor v Ultimate Products Ltd & Anor

Woolley & Anor v Ultimate Products Ltd & Anor

The judge was entitled to find, based on the totality of evidence and his own assessment, that the appellants' use of HENLEYS for watches constituted a misrepresentation likely to deceive a substantial number of the public into believing the goods were those of the respondents, and that this misrepresentation caused damage in the form of lost sales, thus satisfying the requirements for passing off.

Parties
Respondents: Woolley & Anr; Appellants: Ultimate Products Ltd & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Trademark Infringement, Goodwill, Misrepresentation, Damage

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

Parties

Woolley & Anr

Respondents

Ultimate Products Ltd & Anr

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' use of the name HENLEYS for watches constituted passing off against the respondents' HENLEY watches
  2. 2 Whether the requirements of misrepresentation and damage were satisfied for the tort of passing off

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find, based on the totality of evidence and his own assessment, that the appellants' use of HENLEYS for watches constituted a misrepresentation likely to deceive a substantial number of the public into believing the goods were those of the respondents, and that this misrepresentation caused damage in the form of lost sales, thus satisfying the requirements for passing off.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.