Scomadi Ltd & Anor v R A Engineering Company & Ors [2017] EWHC 3342 (IPEC) (6 November 2017)

Scomadi Ltd & Anor v R A Engineering Company & Ors [2017] EWHC 3342 (IPEC) (6 November 2017)

The only issue with the claimants' press release was an ambiguity regarding 'infringement,' which was unintentional and promptly corrected. The evidence did not establish any substantial risk to the course of justice, nor did it support allegations of contempt, abuse of process, or malicious falsehood. The defendants' proposed corrective notice was itself misleading. The application for a publicity order and related relief was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 3342 (IPEC)
Parties
Claimants/respondents: Scomadi Limited and another; Defendants/applicants: R A Engineering Company and others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property (ip) Dispute; Post Trial Application / Application to Vary Consequential Orders Following Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Publicity Orders, Malicious Falsehood, Contempt of Court, Abuse of Process, Registered Designs, Press Releases, Costs
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Publicity Orders Malicious Falsehood Contempt of Court Abuse of Process Registered Designs Press Releases +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scomadi Limited and another

Claimants/respondents

R A Engineering Company and others

Defendants/applicants

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property (ip) Dispute; Post Trial Application / Application to Vary Consequential Orders Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' press release was misleading or amounted to malicious falsehood, contempt of court, or abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether a publicity order should be made requiring the claimants to publish corrective notices and provide information to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The only issue with the claimants' press release was an ambiguity regarding 'infringement,' which was unintentional and promptly corrected. The evidence did not establish any substantial risk to the course of justice, nor did it support allegations of contempt, abuse of process, or malicious falsehood. The defendants' proposed corrective notice was itself misleading. The application for a publicity order and related relief was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants' application to vary the trial order to include publicity orders and disclosure requirements is dismissed.