Scomadi Ltd & Anor v R A Engineering Company & Ors

Scomadi Ltd & Anor v R A Engineering Company & Ors

The only issue with the claimants' press release was an ambiguity regarding 'infringement,' which was unintentional and promptly corrected. The evidence did not establish malicious falsehood, contempt of court, or abuse of process. The relief sought by the defendants was disproportionate and their proposed corrective notice was itself misleading. The application to vary the order was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Scomadi Limited; Defendant/applicant: R A Engineering Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (intellectual Property) / Post Judgment Application to Vary Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Publicity Orders, Malicious Falsehood, Abuse of Process, Contempt of Court, Registered Designs, Press Releases
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Publicity Orders Malicious Falsehood Abuse of Process Contempt of Court Registered Designs Press Releases

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

Parties

Scomadi Limited

Claimant/respondent

R A Engineering Company

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil (intellectual Property) / Post Judgment Application to Vary Order

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 the court should vary its previous order to require specific publicity and corrective actions by the claimants

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 malicious falsehood, contempt of court, or abuse of process. The relief sought by the defendants was disproportionate and their proposed corrective notice was itself misleading. The application to vary the order was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed