The Trademark Licensing Company Ltd & Anor v Leofelis SA [2009] EWHC 3285 (Ch) (11 December 2009)

The Trademark Licensing Company Ltd & Anor v Leofelis SA [2009] EWHC 3285 (Ch) (11 December 2009)

The Milan and English proceedings are not sufficiently closely connected to constitute 'related actions' under Article 28 of the Regulation. Even if they were, the discretion to stay proceedings should not be exercised because the English court is better placed to decide the relevant issues, the risk of irreconcilable judgments is low, and timing favours resolution in England.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 3285 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The Trademark Licensing Company Limited; Claimant: Lonsdale Sports Limited; Defendant: Leofelis SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Application for Stay of Proceedings Under CPR 11
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdiction, Related Actions, Trade Mark Licensing, Contract Termination
Commercial Law Intellectual Property Law Conflict of Laws Stay of Proceedings Jurisdiction Related Actions Trade Mark Licensing Contract Termination

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Trademark Licensing Company Limited

Claimant

Lonsdale Sports Limited

Claimant

Leofelis SA

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Application for Stay of Proceedings Under CPR 11

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English proceedings should be stayed pending resolution of related proceedings in Italy
  2. 2 Whether the Milan and English proceedings are 'related actions' under Article 28 of Council Regulation (EU) 44/2001
  3. 3 Which court was first seised for purposes of Article 28

Ratio Decidendi

The Milan and English proceedings are not sufficiently closely connected to constitute 'related actions' under Article 28 of the Regulation. Even if they were, the discretion to stay proceedings should not be exercised because the English court is better placed to decide the relevant issues, the risk of irreconcilable judgments is low, and timing favours resolution in England.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

  • No stay of proceedings granted
  • Proceedings to continue in English court