Babek International Limited v Iceland Foods Limited & Anor

Babek International Limited v Iceland Foods Limited & Anor

The trade mark, as registered, satisfied the requirements of clarity and precision under s.1(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994. The visual representation and written description, considered together, were not inconsistent or ambiguous. The absence of pantone numbers or precise hues did not result in a multitude of forms or lack of clarity. The reasonable reader would understand the mark as a figurative mark with the features shown. The Sieckmann criteria were met and the trade mark was validly registered.

Parties
Claimant: Babek International Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Iceland Foods Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Nathan Hepurker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Trade Mark / Summary Judgment Application on Counterclaim for Invalidity
Outcome
Counterclaim for invalidity dismissed; trade mark held validly registered.
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Trade Mark Registration, Invalidity, Clarity and Precision, Figurative Marks, Colour Marks
Intellectual Property Law Trade Marks Trade Mark Registration Invalidity Clarity and Precision Figurative Marks Colour Marks

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Babek International Limited

Claimant

Iceland Foods Limited

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Nathan Hepurker

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Trade Mark / Summary Judgment Application on Counterclaim for Invalidity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered trade mark satisfies the requirements of clarity and precision under s.1(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994
  2. 2 Whether the trade mark is invalid for lack of clarity, precision, or a multitude of forms

Ratio Decidendi

The trade mark, as registered, satisfied the requirements of clarity and precision under s.1(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994. The visual representation and written description, considered together, were not inconsistent or ambiguous. The absence of pantone numbers or precise hues did not result in a multitude of forms or lack of clarity. The reasonable reader would understand the mark as a figurative mark with the features shown. The Sieckmann criteria were met and the trade mark was validly registered.

Court Disposition

Counterclaim for invalidity dismissed; trade mark held validly registered.