Ifejika v Ifejika & Anor

Ifejika v Ifejika & Anor

The Court of Appeal held that an equitable assignment of design rights to CCL Vision Limited was at least seriously arguable based on Victor's intention and the registration in the company's name. Even if the registration was invalid, Victor, as the original proprietor, would retain title. The absence of a written assignment was not fatal, and the judge below erred in granting summary judgment for the defendants.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Victor Ifejika; Respondent/defendant: Charles Ifejika; Respondent/defendant: Lens Care Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment (cpr Part 24) in the Chancery Division, Patents Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Registered Designs, Equitable Assignment, Company Dissolution, Title to Intellectual Property, Summary Judgment
Intellectual Property Company Law Registered Designs Equitable Assignment Company Dissolution Title to Intellectual Property Summary Judgment

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Victor Ifejika

Appellant/claimant

Charles Ifejika

Respondent/defendant

Lens Care Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment (cpr Part 24) in the Chancery Division, Patents Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registration of the design in the name of CCL Vision Limited was valid in the absence of a written assignment from Victor Ifejika
  2. 2 Whether an equitable assignment of design rights to CCL Vision Limited occurred
  3. 3 Whether Victor Ifejika has title to sue for infringement of the registered design

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that an equitable assignment of design rights to CCL Vision Limited was at least seriously arguable based on Victor's intention and the registration in the company's name. Even if the registration was invalid, Victor, as the original proprietor, would retain title. The absence of a written assignment was not fatal, and the judge below erred in granting summary judgment for the defendants.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the defendants set aside
  • Registered design claim to proceed to trial