Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Ltd & Ors

Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Ltd & Ors

Procedural defects in defendants' defences were not serious or significant enough to justify strike out; defendants have a real prospect of defending the claim based on dissimilarity of marks and absence of likelihood of confusion or link; claimant not entitled to default judgment as second defendant had filed a defence before valid service; summary judgment and strike out applications dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Red Bull GmbH; First Defendant: Big Horn UK Limited; Second Defendant: Voltino EOOD; Third Defendant: Lyubomir Enchev
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Infringement / Ruling on Applications for Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Default Judgment
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Default Judgment, Service of Process
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Infringement Summary Judgment Strike Out Default Judgment Service of Process

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Red Bull GmbH

Claimant

Big Horn UK Limited

First Defendant

Voltino EOOD

Second Defendant

Lyubomir Enchev

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Infringement / Ruling on Applications for Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' defences should be struck out or summary judgment entered for claimant
  2. 2 Whether claimant is entitled to default judgment against second defendant
  3. 3 Whether procedural defects in defendants' defences justify strike out

Ratio Decidendi

Procedural defects in defendants' defences were not serious or significant enough to justify strike out; defendants have a real prospect of defending the claim based on dissimilarity of marks and absence of likelihood of confusion or link; claimant not entitled to default judgment as second defendant had filed a defence before valid service; summary judgment and strike out applications dismissed.