16 May 2016 / Emily McClure , Alastair Shaw

Issue: 7699 / Categories: Features , Intellectual property

A hard case

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

A hard case

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

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations

What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection?

NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases

When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ

NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR

Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?

NLJ this week: Where would we be without limitation?

In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?

NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap

When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ

Error message

A hard case

High Court decision

High Court decision

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean