Procter & Gamble Company v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd

Procter & Gamble Company v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in principle by failing to apply the correct overall impression test and by generalizing the dominant features of the registered design at too high a level. The Air Wick product produced a different overall impression on the informed user compared to P&G’s registered design. Therefore, there was no infringement. The registered design was, however, valid.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: The Procter & Gamble Company; Appellant/defendant: Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Intellectual Property) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal on infringement allowed; appeal on validity dismissed.
Legal Topics
Registered Community Designs, Design Infringement, Design Validity, Scope of Protection, Informed User Test
Intellectual Property Law Registered Community Designs Design Infringement Design Validity Scope of Protection Informed User Test

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Procter & Gamble Company

Respondent/claimant

Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Limited

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether P&G’s registered community design is valid
  2. 2 Whether Reckitt Benckiser’s Air Wick product infringes P&G’s registered community design

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in principle by failing to apply the correct overall impression test and by generalizing the dominant features of the registered design at too high a level. The Air Wick product produced a different overall impression on the informed user compared to P&G’s registered design. Therefore, there was no infringement. The registered design was, however, valid.

Court Disposition

Appeal on infringement allowed; appeal on validity dismissed.

Orders

  • The finding of infringement is set aside; there is no infringement of P&G’s registered community design by Reckitt Benckiser’s Air Wick product.
  • The registered community design is valid.