The claimant had carried on business as ‘Mr Spicy’ selling snacks, and had obtained community trade marks for the name. He said that the defendant had allowed the infringement of his rights by allowing sainsbury’s to use the terms in their keywords used by the defendant in their sponsored search entries. The defendant sought to strike out the claim.
Held: The claim as pleaded at the present time does not disclose a cause of action and there should be summary judgment for the defendants against the claimant. There was no evidence that any use of te name made by te defendants indicated any origin of the goods and was a trade mark use..
Judges:
Morgan J
Citations:
[2008] EWHC 361 (Ch)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed ECJ 12-Nov-2002
The trade mark owner sought orders against a street vendor who sold articles using their marks. He asserted that the marks were not attached to show any quality, but were used by the fans as badges of allegiance.
Held: The function of a trade . .
Cited – E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another CA 4-Apr-2003
The rules contained two occasions on which a court would consider dismissal of a claim as having ‘no real prospect’ of success.
Held: The only significant difference between CPR 24.2 and 13.3(1), is that under the first the overall burden of . .
Cited by:
See Also – Wilson v Yahoo! UK Ltd and others ChD 25-Feb-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.266468