Inter Lotto (UK) Ltd. v Camelot Group Plc

Inter Lotto (UK) Ltd. v Camelot Group Plc

Section 2(2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 expressly preserves the law of passing off, so the relevant date for assessing reputation and goodwill in a passing off claim is the date when the defendant commences the conduct complained of, not the date of application for registration. The Act does not prevent reliance on goodwill acquired after the application date but before the defendant's use.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Inter Lotto (UK) Ltd; Respondent/defendant: Camelot Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division on a Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Passing Off, Retrospective Effect of Registration
Intellectual Property Commercial Law Trade Marks Passing Off Retrospective Effect of Registration

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inter Lotto (UK) Ltd

Appellant/claimant

Camelot Group PLC

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division on a Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the relevant date for assessing reputation and goodwill in a passing off claim when a trade mark application is made?
  2. 2 Does the Trade Marks Act 1994 prevent reliance on goodwill acquired after the date of application for registration?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 2(2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 expressly preserves the law of passing off, so the relevant date for assessing reputation and goodwill in a passing off claim is the date when the defendant commences the conduct complained of, not the date of application for registration. The Act does not prevent reliance on goodwill acquired after the application date but before the defendant's use.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's appeal dismissed
  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs of the appeal, including costs of the respondent’s notice, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed