Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Novo Nordisk A/S & Anor v British Telecommunications PLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 1094 (Ch) (13 May 2026)
The High Court granted Novo Nordisk a website blocking injunction against ISPs to restrict access to sites selling counterfeit and unlicensed medicines.
The High Court granted Novo Nordisk a website blocking injunction against ISPs targeting websites selling counterfeit and unlicensed prescription medicines.
The IPEC awarded Duadata damages for passing off against Tian Cha Le, accepting a hypothetical lost franchise model but deducting VAT from the claim.
Duadata Ltd v Tian Cha Le Ltd [2026] EWHC 1055 (IPEC) (08 May 2026)
On an inquiry as to damages after default judgment for passing off, the court awarded Duadata ÂŁ14,350, excluding VAT, for loss of a franchise opportunity.
Trade mark infringement and passing off claims by easyGroup over Easyfeet signs failed; the court found no likely confusion, link, detriment or unfair advantage.
Easygroup Ltd v Easyfeetstore OU & Ors [2026] EWHC 767 (IPEC) (01 April 2026)
The court dismissed easyGroup’s trade mark infringement, passing off, and invalidity claims over Easyfeet signs and held the descriptive “easy” prefix was not enough.
Getty Images (US) Inc & Ors v Stability AI Ltd (Re Costs) [2025] EWHC 3419 (Ch) (17 December 2025)
The court held the defendant was overall winner on costs, but awarded the claimants 75% of their costs for the trade mark claim and reduced the defendant’s overall costs accordingly.
The High Court held the Q Deck 1x1 Panel infringed the Macdeck 1x1 Panel Perimeter Design, but not the other pleaded Macdeck designs. Passing off also succeeded.
Dryrobe Ltd v Caesr Group Ltd (t/a D-ROBE OUTDOORS) [2025] EWHC 3167 (IPEC) (04 December 2025)
Dryrobe succeeded in trade mark infringement and passing off against D-ROBE OUTDOORS. The court upheld DRYROBE’s marks, found confusion, and dismissed invalidity and revocation counterclaims.
Defendants infringed Wise Logo Mark by use of 'Wise' signs for payroll services, invoice services, and related downloadable software, causing likelihood of confusion. No infringement of TRANSFERWISE Mark under s10(2) or s10(3) due to insufficient similarity and lack of reputation in Wise solus. Claimant failed in passing off claim; Defendants succeeded in passing off counterclaim for payroll and invoice services. Claimant's Class 9 specifications for computer software and application software were partially invalid for bad faith; specifications narrowed. Recent Marks to be partially invalidat…
Source excerpt
Explore more
