IP-2023-000120 - [2025] EWHC 1793 (IPEC)

This leaves only the question of joint liability. Since on the basis of the facts as found the Defendants are not liable for any act of trade mark infringement, passing off and/or copyright infringement the question of joint liability would not arise.

However, the claim as advanced lacks sufficient particularisation. It was not clear whether for example the claim was simply one that sought to argue that ET and his company were jointly liable for any findings against ET and his company whilst NT and his company were jointly liable for any findings against NT and his company or whether in fact the Claimants were seeking to argue that all four Defendants were joint tortfeasors.

It was not clear how liability for any acts of trade mark infringement, passing off or copyright infringement that had been carried out by ET and NT were passed on to the companies when they were incorporated. Once the companies were incorporated it was not clear how or why it was said their directors would also have personal liability.

The POC do not set out the essential facts said to demonstrate that there was a common design between all four defendants or even each pair of defendants. The fact that ET and NT purchased bags from NHBCL prior to the incorporation of the companies is not sufficient of itself. Given these difficulties were it necessary to do so on the basis of the claim as advanced and such evidence as there was, I would find against the Claimants on Issue 14.