Kingspan Group Plc & Anor v Rockwool Ltd (on costs)

Kingspan was the overall winner as the core issues were decided in its favour, but a discount in costs is justified to reflect its loss on the issue of malice and the failure of the malicious falsehood allegation.

Parties: Claimant: Kingspan Group Plc; Claimant: Kingspan Holdings (IRL) Limited; Defendant: Rockwool Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 14 April 2011
Procedural Posture: Intellectual Property / Costs Ruling After Judgment
Outcome: Kingspan awarded 90% of the costs of the actions, reflecting a 10% discount for its loss on the issue of malice and the malicious falsehood claim.
Legal Topics: Costs, Trade Mark Infringement, Malicious Falsehood, Comparative Advertising

Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Costs Trade Mark Infringement Malicious Falsehood Comparative Advertising

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6

Parties

Kingspan Group Plc

Claimant

Kingspan Holdings (IRL) Limited

Claimant

Rockwool Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property / Costs Ruling After Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Which party should bear the costs of the action?
2 Should costs be apportioned based on issue-based success or failure?
3 Was the allegation of malicious falsehood reasonable and proportionate?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Kingspan awarded 90% of the costs of the actions, reflecting a 10% discount for its loss on the issue of malice and the malicious falsehood claim.

Orders

Kingspan is entitled to 90% of the costs of the actions.