Athleta (ITM) INC v Sports Group Denmark A/S & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 1584 ()

Athleta (ITM) INC v Sports Group Denmark A/S & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 1584 ()

The Court held that the judge erred in distinguishing between the First and Second ATHLECIA Combination signs based solely on the placement of the roundel, as this did not materially affect the likelihood of confusion or the distinctive character of the ATHLETA Combination Mark. Both signs infringed the Combination Mark. The judge also erred in finding no goodwill in the ATHLETA Dark Pinwheel; evidence showed sufficient use to establish goodwill. However, the judge was entitled to find no genuine use of the ATHLETA Combination Mark for bags and headgear, and to find no infringement of the ATHLETA Word Mark by ATHLECIA due to weak distinctiveness and lack of likelihood of confusion.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 1584
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Athleta (ITM) Inc; First Defendant/respondent: Sports Group Denmark A/S; Second Defendant/respondent: Jarrold & Sons Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Passing Off, Revocation for Non Use, Likelihood of Confusion, Genuine Use, Variant Use, Goodwill
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Marks Passing Off Revocation for Non Use Likelihood of Confusion Genuine Use Variant Use +1 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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Athleta (ITM) Inc

Claimant/appellant

Sports Group Denmark A/S

First Defendant/respondent

Jarrold & Sons Limited

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ATHLETA Combination Mark was put to genuine use in the UK/EU for bags and headgear
  2. 2 Whether use of ATHLECIA and related signs infringed the ATHLETA Word Mark and Combination Mark
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in assessing likelihood of confusion and distinctiveness

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the judge erred in distinguishing between the First and Second ATHLECIA Combination signs based solely on the placement of the roundel, as this did not materially affect the likelihood of confusion or the distinctive character of the ATHLETA Combination Mark. Both signs infringed the Combination Mark. The judge also erred in finding no goodwill in the ATHLETA Dark Pinwheel; evidence showed sufficient use to establish goodwill. However, the judge was entitled to find no genuine use of the ATHLETA Combination Mark for bags and headgear, and to find no infringement of the ATHLETA Word Mark by ATHLECIA due to weak distinctiveness and lack of likelihood of confusion.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Declaration that both the First and Second ATHLECIA Combination signs infringe the ATHLETA Combination Mark in relation to clothing
  • Declaration that Athleta has goodwill in the ATHLETA Dark Pinwheel for clothing and that passing off is established in respect of the Second ATHLECIA Combination for clothing