Skip to main content
Log in

Overview of United Kingdom Trade Mark, Design and Copyright Cases 2022

  • Report
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A number of interesting cases involving wide-ranging issues in the intellectual property areas were decided in the UK in 2022. The latest in the saga between Nestle and Cadbury was handed down in Société des Produits Nestlé S.A. v. Cadbury UK Limited. This case concerned the registrability of the colour purple. Also on registrability, we had the decision in Husqvarna Aktiebolag v. UKIPO. This involved the registrability of a 3D trade mark, and the uncertainties surrounding this continue to linger. Moreover, the UKIPO Tribunal decision in Industria De Diseno Textil v. Amber Kotrri was straightforward enough from a factual point of view but garnered a host of publicity due to the PR efforts of one of the parties. It concerned an opposition based on likelihood of confusion and reputation grounds, but the result may be surprising to some readers. ABP Technology Ltd v. Voyetra Turtle Beach, Inc. & Turtle Beach Europe Ltd was particularly interesting from a procedural point of view, and parties are reminded that their litigation strategy can be put to scrutiny. The importance of evidence, and in particular, specific and tailored evidence to a case, was made clear in DC Comics (Partnership) v. Unilever Global IP Limited. Also on evidence, Urbanbubble Ltd & Ors v. Urban Evolution Property Management Ltd (UEPM) & Ors reminds readers that evidence of confusion will not always lead to a finding of infringement or passing off because all the factors will need to be considered. Nonetheless, Match Group v. Muzmatch confirms that the absence of actual confusion is also not decisive in the likelihood of confusion assessment. Goodwill, especially in the case of a music band which then later splits, was considered in Alan Williams Entertainments Ltd and ANOR v. Clarke and Ors. This was a passing off case, with a claim for bad faith in a trade mark application. Though the case is factually complex, the resulting decision is a good reminder to all in the music and performing arts industries. In a similar vein, in Shazam Productions Ltd v. Only Fools the Dining Experience Ltd, the courts considered whether copyright and actionable goodwill could subsist in relation to a television series.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Notes

  1. [2022] EWHC 1671 (Ch).

  2. UKIPO Decision O/658/22.

  3. [2022] EWCA Civ 594.

  4. [2015] EWHC 1345 (TCC).

  5. [2014] EWCA Civ 1609.

  6. [2022] EWHC 434 (Ch).

  7. [2022] EWHC 134 (IPEC).

  8. Neutrogena Corporation v. Golden Limited [1996] RPC 473.

  9. Interflora v. Marks & Spencer Plc [2014] EWCA 1403.

  10. London Taxi Corp Ltd v. Fraser Nash Research Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1729.

  11. Marussia Communications Ireland Ltd v. Manor Grand Prix Racing Ltd [2016] EWHC 809 (Ch).

  12. [2022] EWHC 941 (IPEC).

  13. [2022] EWHC 1798 (IPEC).

  14. [2022] EWHC 1379 (IPEC) (8 June 2022).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yana Zhou.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhou, Y., Weber Bain, A. & Cramp, H. Overview of United Kingdom Trade Mark, Design and Copyright Cases 2022. IIC 54, 412–430 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01303-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01303-0

Keywords

Navigation