Interflora Inc & Anor v Marks and Spencer Plc & Anor [2012] EWHC 1722 (Ch) (20 June 2012)

Interflora Inc & Anor v Marks and Spencer Plc & Anor [2012] EWHC 1722 (Ch) (20 June 2012)

Permission is granted to adduce witness evidence from respondents to the first pilot survey, as precedent allows such evidence even if the survey itself is not statistically valid and the questions are not so flawed as to render the evidence wholly unreliable; permission is refused for the second pilot survey due to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1722 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Interflora Inc; Claimant: Interflora British Unit; Defendant: Marks and Spencer plc; Defendant: Flowers Direct Online Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property / Interim Application for Permission to Adduce Evidence
Outcome
Permission granted in part
Legal Topics
Survey Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Trademark Infringement, Case Management
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Survey Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Trademark Infringement Case Management

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Interflora Inc

Claimant

Interflora British Unit

Claimant

Marks and Spencer plc

Defendant

Flowers Direct Online Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property / Interim Application for Permission to Adduce Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to adduce witness evidence from pilot survey respondents
  2. 2 Admissibility and probative value of evidence obtained from non-statistically valid surveys
  3. 3 Impact of leading or misleading survey questions on admissibility

Ratio Decidendi

Permission is granted to adduce witness evidence from respondents to the first pilot survey, as precedent allows such evidence even if the survey itself is not statistically valid and the questions are not so flawed as to render the evidence wholly unreliable; permission is refused for the second pilot survey due to misleading questions that taint the evidence.

Court Disposition

Permission granted in part

Orders

  • Interflora is granted permission to adduce witness evidence from respondents to the first pilot survey.
  • Interflora is refused permission to adduce witness evidence from respondents to the second pilot survey.