Case No. EWHC-941-(IPEC)

64.It appears that Match learned of Muzmatch’s activities in around January 2016. On 26 January 2016, its representatives wrote to Muzmatch asserting that those activities infringed the 1996 Match.com Mark and the Match Device Mark (amongst other marks) and amounted to passing off. This led to without prejudice settlement discussions where the parties sought to agree terms on which, subject to an agreement on branding style, Muzmatch could continue to use the Muzmatch name. However, these discussions broke down in late 2016. Subsequently, from September 2017, the parties were involved in negotiations as to whether Match could buy Muzmatch. In the course of these negotiations, Match made four separate offers, all of which were rejected by Mr Younas and these negotiations ended in January 2019. 65.As I understand it, Muzmatch’s case is not that these events gave rise to any estoppel but rather that they showed a degree of tolerance of its activities and that this is relevant to explaining its state of mind in continuing to use the Muzmatch name. I will return to this later. However, whatever the position during those discussions, by 2018, Match’s objection to Muzmatch’s use of the Muzmatch name was clear from its oppositions to applications made by Muzmatch to register that name as an EU and a UK trade mark. Those oppositions, based on the grounds that use of that name would give rise to a likelihood of confusion and would take unfair advantage of the reputation of the Match Marks, succeeded in the EU Intellectual Property Office’s Opposition Division on 19 January 2018 and in its Board of Appeal on 25 September 2018 and also in the UK Intellectual Property Office on 12 February 2020.66.On 7 August 2019, Match made a public announcement that it had:“… made an acquisition of Cairo-based Harmonica, an app which approaches mobile matchmaking with respect for local traditions and cultures. In total, a team of 12 full-time employees is joining Match Group to help it serve the Muslim demographic globally”67.The announcement went on to refer to Match’s hopes for “international growth and expansion … mostly across Asia and the Middle East” which included “many countries that are predominantly Muslim” and noted that Harmonica would remain headquartered in Cairo. Mr Younas argues that the fact that Match sought to buy Muzmatch and then acquired Harmonica shows that Match did not cater for the Muslim community. He also points out that when Match re-branded the Harmonica business, it chose not to use the “Match” name, but instead called it “Hawaya”. I will return to these points later in this judgment. In April 2020 the Hawaya app was launched in the UK and is described in the Apple App Store as a “Muslim Marriage App”. The action against Muzmatch was commenced by Claim Form issued on 30 July 2020.