Claim No: IP-2022-000066 - [2024] EWHC 1369 (IPEC)

The Defendants have conceded that C’s Marks are inherently distinctive and have enhanced distinctiveness because of the use made of them. That concession is a sensible one and without it I would have found such enhanced distinctiveness, because of: the length of use of all of C’s Marks since the very beginning of the Morley’s business; the dominant market share of the fried-chicken shop market particularly in South London but now further afield; the attractiveness of the Morley’s brand to franchisees who have opened over 100 Morley’s stores; the extensive evidence I have heard about awards and plaudits gained by the Claimant, its co-branding deals with major international brands including Nike and Heinz; its importance to those growing up in South London in particular, as represented by local musicians in their music, videos and interviews; and the high value of the Morley’s business disclosed in the Claimant’s accounts.

Given that concession, Ms Watkinson in closing accepted that the evidence I heard about goodwill in C’s Marks has limited relevance. As such, the issue about whether the Claimant is the owner of the goodwill in C’s Marks which arose when the business was in SS’s father’s name appears also not to be pursued by the Defendants. If it had required determination, I would have found on the balance of probabilities that it had passed to the Claimant for the reasons that SS gave in his evidence: that all of the existing franchisees at that time continued to pay franchise fees, but paid them to the Claimant and not his father directly; that he was not aware that any complaints were made; and that the Claimant has continued trading under C’s Marks for the decades since, accruing significant further goodwill since then.