Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Sportsdirect.Com Retail Ltd & Ors

Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Sportsdirect.Com Retail Ltd & Ors

The second defendant, as a holding company, is not liable for inducing breach of contract or infringement as no acts were pleaded or proved against it; injunctions should be broad to protect statutory rights; damages inquiry is not limited as to reputation; costs are reserved until quantum is resolved; dissemination...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Lifestyle Equities C. V.; Claimant: Lifestyle Licensing B. V.; Defendant: Sportsdirect.com Retail Limited; Defendant: Sports Direct International PLC; Defendant: SDI (Brook UK) Limited; Defendant: SDI (Brook EU) Limited; Defendant: SDI (Brook ROW) Limited; Defendant: Republic.com Retail Limited; Defendant: Air-Val International S.A.; Defendant: Mr Jonathan Spital; Defendant: Trading Scents (Iver) LLP; Defendant: Trading Scents Limited; Defendant: Mr Eoin Alan McLeod; Defendant: Blueprint Trading SA; Defendant: Direct Supplies (Iver) LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property / Commercial / Post Liability Judgment; Determination of Scope of Injunction, Damages Inquiry, Costs, Dissemination, and Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Claims against second defendant dismissed; broad injunctions granted; damages inquiry not limited as to reputation; costs reserved; dissemination order refused; permission to appeal refused for both parties; stay granted on financial information.
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Inducing Breach of Contract, Vicarious Liability, Injunctions, Damages Inquiry, Costs, Permission to Appeal
Intellectual Property Commercial Law Trade Mark Infringement Inducing Breach of Contract Vicarious Liability Injunctions Damages Inquiry Costs +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lifestyle Equities C. V.

Claimant

Lifestyle Licensing B. V.

Claimant

Sportsdirect.com Retail Limited

Defendant

Sports Direct International PLC

Defendant

SDI (Brook UK) Limited

Defendant

SDI (Brook EU) Limited

Defendant

SDI (Brook ROW) Limited

Defendant

Republic.com Retail Limited

Defendant

Air-Val International S.A.

Defendant

Mr Jonathan Spital

Defendant

Trading Scents (Iver) LLP

Defendant

Trading Scents Limited

Defendant

Mr Eoin Alan McLeod

Defendant

Blueprint Trading SA

Defendant

Direct Supplies (Iver) LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property / Commercial / Post Liability Judgment; Determination of Scope of Injunction, Damages Inquiry, Costs, Dissemination, and Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second defendant (Sports Direct International PLC) is liable for inducing breach of contract and infringement claims
  2. 2 Scope of final injunction to be granted
  3. 3 Whether damages inquiry should include damage to reputation

Ratio Decidendi

The second defendant, as a holding company, is not liable for inducing breach of contract or infringement as no acts were pleaded or proved against it; injunctions should be broad to protect statutory rights; damages inquiry is not limited as to reputation; costs are reserved until quantum is resolved; dissemination order is refused as disproportionate; permission to appeal is refused for both parties as no realistically arguable grounds exist.

Court Disposition

Claims against second defendant dismissed; broad injunctions granted; damages inquiry not limited as to reputation; costs reserved; dissemination order refused; permission to appeal refused for both parties; stay granted on financial information.

Orders

  • Broad injunctions granted against relevant defendants as per claimants' draft.
  • Damages inquiry or account of profits to be determined at further hearing, not limited as to reputation.