Nude Brands Ltd.v Stella MccArtney Ltd & Ors

Nude Brands Ltd.v Stella MccArtney Ltd & Ors

The balance of injustice requires refusal of the interim injunction. The likely damage to SML and L’Oreal if an injunction is wrongly granted outweighs the damage to NBL if it is refused. The likelihood of actual confusion between the products in the market place is minimal, and damages at trial are more likely to restore NBL than an award under the cross undertaking to SML. The application for an expedited trial is also refused as NBL will not suffer significant irreparable harm before a normal trial.

Parties
Claimant: Nude Brands Limited; First Defendant: Stella McCartney Limited; Second Defendant: YSL Beaute Limited; Third Defendant: L’Oreal (U. K.) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Interim Injunction and Expedited Trial
Outcome
Application for interim injunction and expedited trial dismissed.
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Interim Injunctions, Community Trade Mark Regulation, Balance of Convenience
Intellectual Property Commercial Law Trade Mark Infringement Interim Injunctions Community Trade Mark Regulation Balance of Convenience

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 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nude Brands Limited

Claimant

Stella McCartney Limited

First Defendant

YSL Beaute Limited

Second Defendant

L’Oreal (U. K.) Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Interim Injunction and Expedited Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of 'STELLANUDE' infringes Community Trade Mark Registration No 5 781 745 for 'NUDE'
  2. 2 Whether there is a triable issue regarding validity and infringement of the mark
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The balance of injustice requires refusal of the interim injunction. The likely damage to SML and L’Oreal if an injunction is wrongly granted outweighs the damage to NBL if it is refused. The likelihood of actual confusion between the products in the market place is minimal, and damages at trial are more likely to restore NBL than an award under the cross undertaking to SML. The application for an expedited trial is also refused as NBL will not suffer significant irreparable harm before a normal trial.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction and expedited trial dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for interim injunction refused.
  • Application for expedited trial refused.