Crafts Group LLC v M/S Indeutsch International & Anor (Supplemental Judgment) [2023] EWHC 1914 (IPEC) (26 July 2023)

Crafts Group LLC v M/S Indeutsch International & Anor (Supplemental Judgment) [2023] EWHC 1914 (IPEC) (26 July 2023)

The court retains jurisdiction as an EU trade mark court for proceedings instituted before IP completion day and related actions, including unjustified threats, under both EU and UK transitional provisions. Article 132(1) is engaged for such actions, requiring a stay, and case management grounds independently...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1914 (IPEC)
Parties
Claimant: Crafts Group LLC; Defendant: M/S Indeutsch International; Defendant: M/S KnitPro International
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Supplemental Judgment / Post Judgment Clarification and Reasons
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; supplemental reasons provided.
Legal Topics
EU Trade Mark Regulation, Jurisdiction, Unjustified Threats, Case Management, Transitional Provisions
Intellectual Property European Union Law Civil Procedure EU Trade Mark Regulation Jurisdiction Unjustified Threats Case Management Transitional Provisions

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crafts Group LLC

Claimant

M/S Indeutsch International

Defendant

M/S KnitPro International

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Supplemental Judgment / Post Judgment Clarification and Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court retains jurisdiction as an EU trade mark court after IP completion day
  2. 2 Whether Article 132(1) of the Trade Mark Regulation is engaged for actions for unjustified threats
  3. 3 Adequacy of reasons for jurisdiction and stay decisions

Ratio Decidendi

The court retains jurisdiction as an EU trade mark court for proceedings instituted before IP completion day and related actions, including unjustified threats, under both EU and UK transitional provisions. Article 132(1) is engaged for such actions, requiring a stay, and case management grounds independently justify staying all claims.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; supplemental reasons provided.

Orders

  • Court retains jurisdiction as EU trade mark court for pending proceedings and related actions.
  • Actions relating to the EU Chevron Mark stayed under Article 132(1) of the Trade Mark Regulation.