CA-2025-000162 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1340

adidas relied in support of its appeal upon the decisions of the Cancellation Division and of the District Court of The Hague, which were in its favour. Its reliance upon the decisions of the Cancellation Division was misplaced, not only because the judge considered these with care and explained why she disagreed with them, but also because the Board of Appeal disagreed with the reasoning of the Cancellation Division. In essence, the Board of Appeal interpreted the trade marks as figurative marks limited to the pictorial representations (contrary to adidas’ case, but with the consequence that the registrations were valid). Furthermore, we were told that the decisions were under appeal to the General Court. As for the District Court of The Hague’s decision, while this is a judgment of an experienced court in intellectual property matters and is therefore entitled to respect, it does not demonstrate that the judge made any error of law or principle.