L A T E R
15I turn now to the application notice, dated 18 November 2021, by which Anytime UK seeks an order that the claim against it be struck out; alternatively, that there be summary judgment in Anytime UK’s favour. 16Anytime UK’s position in brief is that as master franchisor it had no knowledge of the Google advertisement placed by Tribe, the advertisement complained of.17The claimants make two arguments in support of their contention that Anytime UK is jointly liable with Tribe for Tribe’s infringement of the claimants’ trade marks. Neither argument is pleaded. However, I will leave that to one side since if either argument provides a basis for my concluding that the claimants have a real prospect of succeeding in their claim against Anytime UK, I would allow the claimants the opportunity to amend their Particulars of Claim. Giving the claimants that opportunity is particularly important where, as here, they are not professionally represented.18The claimants’ first argument is that Anytime UK has control and right of approval over all Tribe’s advertising. An inference was drawn by the claimants by reference to a template franchise agreement, which apparently emerged in the course of discovery in US proceedings, and also by reference to a franchise operational manual apparently disclosed in the present proceedings by Anytime UK. 19In a witness statement dated 28 April 2022 Ms West, Anytime UK’s solicitor, draws attention to section 6 of the franchise agreement, which is headed “Advertising and Promotion”, and, in particular:“C.