Schuh Ltd v Shhhh Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSOH_123 (26 July 2011)
The pursuers failed to establish a prima facie case that the defenders' sign and their mark are similar, and thus failed under s.10(2), s.10(3), and passing off. Even if a prima facie case had been made, the balance of convenience favoured the defenders, as granting interdict would irreparably damage their business while the pursuers were unlikely to suffer harm.
- Citation
- [2011] ScotCS CSOH_123
- Parties
- Pursuer: Schuh Limited; Defender: Shhh... Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 26 July 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Interim Interdict Application / Motion for Interim Interdict
- Outcome
- motion for interim interdict refused
- Legal Topics
- Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off, Interim Interdict
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Schuh Limited
Pursuer
Shhh... Limited
Defender
Procedural Posture
Interim Interdict Application / Motion for Interim Interdict
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defenders' use of 'Shhh', 'shhh-oohs' or similar signs infringes the pursuers' registered trade mark 'Schuh' under s.10(2) and s.10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994
- 2 Whether the defenders' use constitutes passing off
- 3 Whether interim interdict should be granted
Ratio Decidendi
The pursuers failed to establish a prima facie case that the defenders' sign and their mark are similar, and thus failed under s.10(2), s.10(3), and passing off. Even if a prima facie case had been made, the balance of convenience favoured the defenders, as granting interdict would irreparably damage their business while the pursuers were unlikely to suffer harm.
Court Disposition
motion for interim interdict refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment