Case No. EWHC-941-(IPEC)

68.Match’s claim is that Muzmatch has used signs (“the Muzmatch Signs”) which infringe the Match Marks under s.10(2)(b) and/or s.10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and also, in the case of the two European trade marks (the 1996 Match.com Mark and the 2017 Match.com Mark) for the period before the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, infringe those Marks under Articles 9(2)(b) and/or 9(2)(c) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation. 69.The Muzmatch Signs for these purposes are those of the logos shown in paragraph 53 above that include “match” (as part of the word Muzmatch) and the keywords featuring the word “match” that were used by Muzmatch as part of its SEO activities as set out in paragraph 58 above.70.Regarding the Match Marks, only one of these predated the time in April or May 2011 when Muzmatch started trading. Notwithstanding this, there was no counterclaim for invalidity of the two later Match Marks based on Muzmatch’s earlier use.