Horsham Nutraceuticals Ltd & Anor v Manna Pro Products LLC

Horsham Nutraceuticals Ltd & Anor v Manna Pro Products LLC

Counterclaims for invalidity and assignment under EUTMR are not restricted to infringement proceedings; English courts have jurisdiction as EU trade mark courts to hear the Defendant's counterclaim and assignment request. Summary judgment on the 1998 agreement is inappropriate due to unresolved factual issues and its secondary relevance to the Defendant's case.

Parties
Claimant: Horsham Nutraceuticals Limited; Claimant: Equine America (UK) Limited; Defendant: Manna Pro Products LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications
Outcome
Claimants' application to strike out parts of Defence and Counterclaim and for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
EU Trade Mark Regulation, Jurisdiction, Assignment of Trade Marks, Invalidity of Trade Marks, Passing Off, Goodwill
Intellectual Property Commercial Law EU Trade Mark Regulation Jurisdiction Assignment of Trade Marks Invalidity of Trade Marks Passing Off Goodwill

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

Horsham Nutraceuticals Limited

Claimant

Equine America (UK) Limited

Claimant

Manna Pro Products LLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Jurisdiction of English courts over EU trade mark assignment and invalidity claims
  2. 2 Scope of counterclaims under EUTMR Articles 21 and 60(1)(c)
  3. 3 Interpretation of procedural provisions in EUTMR Chapter 10

Ratio Decidendi

Counterclaims for invalidity and assignment under EUTMR are not restricted to infringement proceedings; English courts have jurisdiction as EU trade mark courts to hear the Defendant's counterclaim and assignment request. Summary judgment on the 1998 agreement is inappropriate due to unresolved factual issues and its secondary relevance to the Defendant's case.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application to strike out parts of Defence and Counterclaim and for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • Defendant's Defence and Counterclaim remain; no summary judgment granted on 1998 agreement.