Claim No: IP-2022-000076 - [2024] EWHC 88 (IPEC)
Intellectual Property Enterprise Court

Claim No: IP-2022-000076 - [2024] EWHC 88 (IPEC)

Fecha: 24-Ene-2024

THE CLAIM

THE CLAIM

4.

Thatchers claims that Aldi has infringed the Trade Mark pursuant to sections 10(2)(b) and 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (“TMA”) and it further claims in passing off. I note for convenience here that Thatchers does not bring a claim that the brand “TAURUS” infringes its word mark “THATCHERS”.

5.

Mr Howe, Kings Counsel, together with his junior Ms Collett, appeared before me for Thatchers. Ms Wickenden, together with her junior Ms Herrett, appeared before me for Aldi. I am grateful to them all for their careful and comprehensive skeleton arguments, their helpful oral submissions, and for the note of evidence to assist me in closing, that Mr Howe KC generously credited to Ms Collett.

6.

In its particulars of claim, Thatchers pleads that the overall appearance of the Aldi Product is highly similar to that of the Thatchers Product. Its case in relation to section 10(3) TMA is that the Court should infer that Aldi intentionally mimicked the appearance of the Thatchers Product in designing the appearance of the Aldi Product, and in doing so, amongst other things:

i)

intentionally set out to cause a link in the minds of consumers between the two in order to encourage consumers to buy the Aldi Product; and

ii)

took unfair advantage of, or caused detriment to, the distinctive character and repute of the Trade Mark, without due cause.

7.

For its claims in infringement of the Trade Mark, it is necessary for Thatchers to identify the sign used by Aldi which is said to infringe the Trade Mark. This gives rise to a preliminary issue which I will deal with now.