LAPPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED v MR BASIL IBRAHIM RASSAM

LAPPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED v MR BASIL IBRAHIM RASSAM

The present claim is not a claim for money, so the absence of a statement of value over £100,000 or assignment to IPEC in the claim form does not deprive the High Court of jurisdiction. The claim was properly issued in the High Court. Transfer to IPEC is not warranted as the Defendants have not shown they can only afford to litigate there, and the case may involve complexity and value not yet fully ascertainable.

Parties
Claimant: Lappet Manufacturing Company Limited; Claimant: Shemagh Al Bassam Company; Defendant: Mr Basil Ibrahim Rassam; Defendant: Mr Ibrahim Rassam; Defendant: London Textile Industries Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Trade Mark Infringement Action / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Transfer Applications
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Jurisdiction, Transfer of Proceedings, Court Fees, Revocation of Trade Marks
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Infringement Jurisdiction Transfer of Proceedings Court Fees Revocation of Trade Marks

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lappet Manufacturing Company Limited

Claimant

Shemagh Al Bassam Company

Claimant

Mr Basil Ibrahim Rassam

Defendant

Mr Ibrahim Rassam

Defendant

London Textile Industries Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trade Mark Infringement Action / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Transfer Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the claim absent a statement of value over £100,000 or assignment to IPEC
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be transferred to the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC)

Ratio Decidendi

The present claim is not a claim for money, so the absence of a statement of value over £100,000 or assignment to IPEC in the claim form does not deprive the High Court of jurisdiction. The claim was properly issued in the High Court. Transfer to IPEC is not warranted as the Defendants have not shown they can only afford to litigate there, and the case may involve complexity and value not yet fully ascertainable.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Jurisdiction Application dismissed
  • Transfer Application dismissed