Wise Payments Limited v With Wise Limited & Ors

Wise Payments Limited v With Wise Limited & Ors

The application to join Mr Hinrikus and Mr Käärmann as counterclaim defendants succeeds as the substantive case against them is arguable and the cost-benefit analysis does not outweigh the First Defendant’s interest in having its case heard. The application to join Mr Nash is dismissed as the evidence does not establish a sufficiently arguable case of joint tortfeasorship and cost-benefit considerations weigh against his inclusion.

Parties
Claimant: Wise Payments Limited; First Defendant: With Wise Limited; Second Defendant: Simon Paul Hills; Third Defendant: James Matthew Orton; Fourth Defendant: Daniel Philip Richards; Proposed Third Party (joined by Consent): Wise Plc; Proposed Fourth Party (application to Join Granted): Kristo Käärmann; Proposed Fifth Party (application to Join Granted): Taavet Hinrikus; Proposed Sixth Party (application to Join Dismissed): Dean Nash
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Dispute (trade Mark and Passing Off) / Ruling on Application to Join Additional Parties to Counterclaim at CMC
Outcome
Application to join Wise Plc, Mr Käärmann, and Mr Hinrikus as counterclaim defendants granted; application to join Mr Nash dismissed.
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off, Joint Tortfeasorship, Case Management, Party Joinder, Costs Benefit Analysis
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Infringement Passing Off Joint Tortfeasorship Case Management Party Joinder Costs Benefit Analysis

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wise Payments Limited

Claimant

With Wise Limited

First Defendant

Simon Paul Hills

Second Defendant

James Matthew Orton

Third Defendant

Daniel Philip Richards

Fourth Defendant

Wise Plc

Proposed Third Party (joined by Consent)

Kristo Käärmann

Proposed Fourth Party (application to Join Granted)

Taavet Hinrikus

Proposed Fifth Party (application to Join Granted)

Dean Nash

Proposed Sixth Party (application to Join Dismissed)

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Dispute (trade Mark and Passing Off) / Ruling on Application to Join Additional Parties to Counterclaim at CMC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed additional parties should be joined as counterclaim defendants for passing off
  2. 2 Whether the evidence against Mr Nash establishes a sufficiently arguable case of joint tortfeasorship
  3. 3 Whether the cost-benefit and case management considerations justify joinder of additional parties

Ratio Decidendi

The application to join Mr Hinrikus and Mr Käärmann as counterclaim defendants succeeds as the substantive case against them is arguable and the cost-benefit analysis does not outweigh the First Defendant’s interest in having its case heard. The application to join Mr Nash is dismissed as the evidence does not establish a sufficiently arguable case of joint tortfeasorship and cost-benefit considerations weigh against his inclusion.

Court Disposition

Application to join Wise Plc, Mr Käärmann, and Mr Hinrikus as counterclaim defendants granted; application to join Mr Nash dismissed.

Orders

  • Wise Plc joined as counterclaim defendant by consent.
  • Mr Kristo Käärmann and Mr Taavet Hinrikus joined as counterclaim defendants.