CA-2024-00277 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1000

Appeal ground 6 is contingent on appeal ground 1 and affected by appeal ground 2. Since I have concluded that appeal ground 1 succeeds, but appeal ground 2 does not, infringement of the Easylife Stylised Mark must be considered on the footing that the specification falls to be partially revoked. The judge’s assessment at [225] is not undermined by this, because he assumed for that purpose that the Mark was not to be revoked. easyGroup contends that the judge’s assessment was infected with the same errors as his assessment with respect to the Easylife Word Mark, which are the subject of appeal ground 5. The Defendants again contend that, even if the judge erred, he reached the right conclusion. Since I have rejected ground 5, it follows that ground 6 must also be rejected.