header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 May 2016 / Emily McClure , Alastair Shaw
Issue: 7699 / Categories: Features , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

A hard case

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7699_mcclure

The Supreme Court rules on European design law for first time, Alastair Shaw & Emily McClure report

The Trunki range of ride-on suitcases for young children has been enormously successful since they were first marketed in 2004. Magmatic Ltd (Magmatic), the owners of the registered Community design for the Trunki ride-on suitcase (the Trunki RCD), estimate that in 2011 approximately 20% of all three to six year olds in the UK had one.

PMS International Ltd (PMS), a manufacturer in the discount toy sector of the market, recognised the Trunki's qualities and also spotted a potential gap in the market for a discount version. In 2012, PMS started to sell their own range of ride-on suitcases, which they called the Kiddee Case.

High Court decision 

Magmatic sued PMS for infringement of the Trunki RCD, as well as for infringement of its unregistered design rights in the Trunki design, and copyright in the artwork for its packaging.

In July 2013, the High Court ruled that the Kiddee Case did infringe the Trunki

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
NLJ this week: Diamond rings and broken promises

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: The battle over medical report fees intensifies
Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll