Case No. IP-2020-000081

6.All three claimant companies are in the property management business, sharing the same sole director, Michael Howard. The First Claimant was incorporated in February 2008 and began trading in that year, managing an apartment block in Manchester. The Third Claimant was incorporated in January 2016 to handle sales and lettings.7.In February 2016 Mr Howard agreed with The Elliot Group International Limited (“Elliot”), a property development company based in Liverpool, that the First Claimant would manage residential buildings in Liverpool which were due for completion in the summer of 2016. These were referred to in the evidence as the “EG Liverpool Buildings”. The prime mover behind Elliot was and is the founder and director of the company, Elliot Lawless.8.In July 2016 Elliot asked Mr Howard to use the Fifth Defendant (“Mr Tumilty”) as letting agent for a portion of the EG Liverpool Buildings. In about the same month Mr Tumilty’s company, then called Liverpool City Lets Limited, took on about 25% of the Liverpool properties otherwise managed by the First and Third Claimants. Liverpool City Lets Limited later changed its name to Liverpool City Rents Limited and it is convenient to refer to the company in both guises as “LCR”.9.In August 2016 the Second Claimant was incorporated as the vehicle for the management of the EG Liverpool Buildings. Hereafter it will generally be unnecessary for me to distinguish between the Claimants.10.UEPM was incorporated on 10 March 2018 with Mr El Paraiso as managing director. Mr Tumilty and the Fourth Defendant (“Mr Spencer”) were directors, as was Mr El Paraiso’s wife Ruth, the Third Defendant.11.On 26 March 2018 UEPM’s website went live. It showed that UEPM was trading under the name “Urban Evolution” and was using a logo featuring that name, referred to at trial as UEPM’s “Old Logo”. Below is shown the Claimants’ logo on the left and UEPM’s Old Logo on the right: 12.Early in the day after the website went live, on 27 March 2018, Mr Tumilty received a phone call from Laura Caffery, a letting agent acting for the Claimants. Ms Caffery complained that UEPM’s Old Logo was too similar to the Claimants’ logo. This was followed by an email of the same date from Ms Caffery to Mr Tumilty expressing a similar view in strong terms.13.There were then exchanges between Mr Howard and Mr Tumilty. After these, by an email timed at 13:35 on 27 March 2018 Mr Tumilty instructed UEPM’s graphic design company, The Cheerful Lime Limited, to redesign the logo.14.UEPM’s website was updated on 29 March 2018 to show an amended logo, that described at trial as UEPM’s “New Logo”. The website still used the sign Urban Evolution to refer to UEPM, indicating that there had been no change in trading name. This is the New Logo still used by UEPM, in several colourways apparently, although I was told that nothing turns on colour: 15.On 12 April 2018 Mr Howard sent Mr Tumilty an email stating that matters had been resolved. The Defendants rely on this and on other exchanges between the parties as establishing consent by the Claimants to UEPM keeping its Urban Evolution trading name. I will consider them in more detail below.16.One of the assets owned by Elliot and managed by the Claimants was a building in Liverpool known as “the Artesian”. In July 2018 Elliot appointed UEPM to manage the letting of commercial units in the Artesian. The Claimants at that time continued to act as letting agents for the residential properties in the building.17.In October 2018 Mr El Paraiso received emails from third parties asking whether there was a connection between Urban Evolution and Urbanbubble. Unaware of these at the time, the Claimants now rely on them as proof of a likelihood of confusion between their trade mark and UEPM’s trading name and of a misrepresentation generated by the use of that sign.18.Tension which already strained the relationship between the parties was exacerbated in March 2019 when Mr Howard discovered that UEPM intended to apply to take over the management of the Artesian as a whole by a process known as a “Right to Manage” – an RTM application. Up to this point LCR had acted as letting agent for some of the Elliot properties in Liverpool managed by the Claimants but at the end of March 2019 the Claimants terminated their commercial relationship with LCR.19.On 28 October 2019 Mr El Paraiso sent an email to the First and Second Claimants saying that UEPM would take over management of the Artesian entirely on 3 February 2020. In February 2020 Elliot removed the Second Claimant as management agent for all the Liverpool properties which up to then had been managed by the Second Claimant and in its place appointed UEPM. Counsel for the Claimants described the relationship between Mr Howard and Mr El Paraiso as having by this time become toxic, which seems accurate – intemperate emails were exchanged.20.In early February 2020 Mr El Paraiso received phone calls enquiring about the relationship between Urban Evolution, Urbanbubble and Elliot. The Claimants rely on these as further evidence of a likelihood of trade mark confusion and of a misrepresentation.21.On 17 June 2020 a letter before claim was sent on behalf of the Claimants. The Claim Form was issued on 23 November 2020.