Helme & Ors v Maher & Anor [2015] EWHC 3151 (IPEC) (02 November 2015)

Helme & Ors v Maher & Anor [2015] EWHC 3151 (IPEC) (02 November 2015)

The defendants were granted a broad, terminable licence by Mrs Helme to use the 'Hidden Gem' trade name, logo, and photograph for any purpose reasonably considered to be for the advancement of the joint enterprise. The licence persisted until at least 9 April 2010 and was not narrowed or terminated before that date....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 3151 (IPEC)
Parties
First Claimant: Janet Helme; Second Claimant: Laura Helme; Third Claimant: Hidden Gem Jewellery Company (A Firm); Defendant: Richard Maher; Defendant: Michael Green
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property and Passing Off Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Passing Off, Licensing, Goodwill, Accord and Satisfaction
Intellectual Property Contract Commercial Law Copyright Infringement Passing Off Licensing Goodwill Accord and Satisfaction

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Helme

First Claimant

Laura Helme

Second Claimant

Hidden Gem Jewellery Company (A Firm)

Third Claimant

Richard Maher

Defendant

Michael Green

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property and Passing Off Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants were licensed to use the 'Hidden Gem' trade name, logo, and photograph
  2. 2 Whether the licence was terminated or narrowed before 9 April 2010
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' acts constituted passing off or copyright infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were granted a broad, terminable licence by Mrs Helme to use the 'Hidden Gem' trade name, logo, and photograph for any purpose reasonably considered to be for the advancement of the joint enterprise. The licence persisted until at least 9 April 2010 and was not narrowed or terminated before that date. All acts complained of were within the scope of the licence or sub-licence, and there was no unlawful use. There was no accord and satisfaction as there was no meeting of minds regarding settlement.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed