LUEN FAT METAL AND PLASTIC MANUFACTORY CO LTD v FUNKO UK LTD

LUEN FAT METAL AND PLASTIC MANUFACTORY CO LTD v FUNKO UK LTD

The claimant failed to prove infringement under sections 10(1), 10(2), and 10(3) because the defendant's use of 'Funtime Freddy' and 'Funtime Foxy' was not identical to the marks, was not likely to cause confusion, did not create a link or association, and did not cause detriment, tarnishment, or unfair advantage. The claimant's evidence of enhanced distinctiveness and reputation was insufficient, and the defendant's use was primarily descriptive of game characters.

Parties
Claimant: Luen Fat Metal and Plastic Manufactory Co Ltd; Defendant: Funko UK, Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Infringement / Judgment After Trial of Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Trademark Infringement, Proof of Use, Distinctiveness, Likelihood of Confusion, Reputation, Fair Specification
Intellectual Property Trademark Law Trademark Infringement Proof of Use Distinctiveness Likelihood of Confusion Reputation Fair Specification

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Luen Fat Metal and Plastic Manufactory Co Ltd

Claimant

Funko UK, Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Infringement / Judgment After Trial of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's use of 'Funtime Freddy' and 'Funtime Foxy' infringed the claimant's UK and EU registered trademarks under sections 10(1), 10(2), and 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994
  2. 2 Whether the claimant proved genuine use of the marks for the relevant goods
  3. 3 Whether the marks had acquired enhanced distinctiveness or reputation

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove infringement under sections 10(1), 10(2), and 10(3) because the defendant's use of 'Funtime Freddy' and 'Funtime Foxy' was not identical to the marks, was not likely to cause confusion, did not create a link or association, and did not cause detriment, tarnishment, or unfair advantage. The claimant's evidence of enhanced distinctiveness and reputation was insufficient, and the defendant's use was primarily descriptive of game characters.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed