Scomadi Ltd & Anor v RA Engineering Co. Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2907 (IPEC) (27 October 2017)

Scomadi Ltd & Anor v RA Engineering Co. Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2907 (IPEC) (27 October 2017)

Permission to appeal was refused as the claimants failed to identify any real prospect of success or error of principle in the judgment, did not challenge key factual findings or the application of estoppel, and raised new arguments not advanced at trial. The publicity order was refused due to limited publicity and the defendants' ability to publicise the outcome themselves. Disclosure of the recipients of the claimants' letter was ordered as the defendants had a legitimate purpose and the law supports such disclosure. Costs were awarded to the defendants as the substantive winners, with an interim payment on account of £42,000 ordered.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2907 (IPEC)
Parties
Claimant/applicant/defendant to Additional Counterclaim: Scomadi Limited; Claimant/applicant/defendant to Additional Counterclaim: Scomadi Worldwide Limited; Defendant/respondent: RA Engineering Co. Limited; Defendant/respondent: Yiming Chen; Defendant/respondent: MotoGB Limited; Additional Counterclaimant: Changzhou Hanwei Vehicle Science & Technology Limited Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Dispute (design Rights, Passing Off, Trade Marks, Contractual Issues) / Post Trial Judgment on Permission to Appeal, Publicity Order, Disclosure, and Costs
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; publicity order refused; disclosure of letter recipients ordered; costs awarded to defendants; interim payment on account ordered.
Legal Topics
Registered Community Design, UK Unregistered Design Right, Passing Off, Trade Marks, Joint Ownership of Designs, Estoppel, Disclosure Orders, Costs Orders, Publicity Orders, Appeal Permission
Intellectual Property Contract Law Civil Procedure Registered Community Design UK Unregistered Design Right Passing Off Trade Marks Joint Ownership of Designs +5 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scomadi Limited

Claimant/applicant/defendant to Additional Counterclaim

Scomadi Worldwide Limited

Claimant/applicant/defendant to Additional Counterclaim

RA Engineering Co. Limited

Defendant/respondent

Yiming Chen

Defendant/respondent

MotoGB Limited

Defendant/respondent

Changzhou Hanwei Vehicle Science & Technology Limited Company

Additional Counterclaimant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Dispute (design Rights, Passing Off, Trade Marks, Contractual Issues) / Post Trial Judgment on Permission to Appeal, Publicity Order, Disclosure, and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted on findings regarding joint ownership of designs and construction of the Supplementary Agreement
  2. 2 Whether a publicity order should be made requiring claimants to publish a notice on their website
  3. 3 Whether claimants should disclose the recipients of a letter sent regarding termination of manufacture

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal was refused as the claimants failed to identify any real prospect of success or error of principle in the judgment, did not challenge key factual findings or the application of estoppel, and raised new arguments not advanced at trial. The publicity order was refused due to limited publicity and the defendants' ability to publicise the outcome themselves. Disclosure of the recipients of the claimants' letter was ordered as the defendants had a legitimate purpose and the law supports such disclosure. Costs were awarded to the defendants as the substantive winners, with an interim payment on account of £42,000 ordered.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; publicity order refused; disclosure of letter recipients ordered; costs awarded to defendants; interim payment on account ordered.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused to claimants.
  • No order for claimants to publish a notice on their website.