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
Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Frasers Group Trading Ltd (formerly called Sportsdirect.com Retail Ltd) & Ors [2026] EWCA Civ 583 (12 May 2026)
The Court of Appeal held that unregistered sub-licensee losses could not be recovered under s.30(6) Trade Marks Act 1994 and were statute barred.
The Court of Appeal held that the judge applied the wrong section 12(3) threshold for an interim injunction restraining alleged unjustified threats and set the injunction aside.
The High Court struck out contempt proceedings over trade mark registration correspondence with the UKIPO, and held the joinder application would have failed.
Consorzio di Tutela Della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco v Prosecco International Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 912 (IPEC) (15 April 2026)
The High Court dismissed defendants’ strike-out and summary judgment application in a Prosecco branding dispute, holding the infringement claims needed trial.
After discontinuance of a libel claim, the High Court ordered FCB to pay indemnity costs from 10 October 2023, but refused a non-party costs order against Andrew Gallagher.
Full Colour Black Ltd (t/a Brandalised) v The Artist Known As "Banksy" & Anor [2026] EWHC 795 (KB) (01 April 2026)
Costs ruling after a discontinued libel claim: the claimant was ordered to pay indemnity costs, but a non-party costs order against Andrew Gallagher was refused.
The Supreme Court dismissed Oatly’s appeal, holding that POST MILK GENERATION used “milk” as a prohibited designation for oat-based products and was not saved by the proviso.
Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd v Bargain Busting Ltd [2025] EWHC 3141 (Ch) (28 November 2025)
The High Court summarily assessed costs at ÂŁ55,000 against SKE after it withdrew its stay application following refusal of permission to appeal.
The trade mark, as registered, satisfied the requirements of clarity and precision under s.1(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994. The visual representation and written description, considered together, were not inconsistent or ambiguous. The absence of pantone numbers or precise hues did not result in a multitude of forms or lack of clarity. The reasonable reader would understand the mark as a figurative mark with the features shown. The Sieckmann criteria were met and the trade mark was validly registered.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that the judge erred in finding that the placement of the roundel in the First ATHLECIA Combination precluded infringement of the ATHLETA Combination Mark, as the difference was not material to the likelihood of confusion. The court also found the judge's conclusion that there was no goodwill in the ATHLETA Dark Pinwheel insupportable, given the evidence of its use in John Lewis stores. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed to the extent of finding infringement and passing off by use of both the First and Second ATHLECIA Combinations. The remainder of the appeal was dis…
Source excerpt
Explore more
