header-logo header-logo

23 October 2014
Issue: 7627 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Trade mark dispute: Specsavers v Asda

Specsavers triumphs over Asda in logo trademark battle

Specsavers has triumphed in a five-year trade mark dispute with Asda over its overlapping ellipses logo, which resembles a pair of spectacles.

The dispute arose when Asda prepared marketing based on a similar shape. Specsavers contested this on the basis of trade mark infringement and passing off. The High Court found in favour of Asda and revoked Specsavers wordless trade mark on the basis of non-use since they always have the word “Specsavers” superimposed on them. The case has since been settled out of court, but Specsavers appealed the decision to revoke the wordless logo.

The Court of Appeal has now held that registration of the wordless logo should be reinstated, after referring the issue of non-use to the Court of Justice in Europe (CJEU).

Antony Gold, partner at HGF Law, who acted for Specsavers, says one important issue was whether the public “actually saw or perceived the wordless logo underneath. In this respect, Specsavers was able to point to evidence that, when formulating its marketing campaign, Asda’s marketing team had produced a series of potential logos it could use, each of which, to varying degrees, was modelled on Specsavers’ overlapping ellipses.” This evidence helped to demonstrate that the overlapping ellipses had a separate identity from the usual use of the ellipses with “Specsavers” superimposed.

Ruling in Specsavers v Asda [2014] EWCA Civ 1294, Lord Justice Kitchin said: “It is reasonable to suppose that Asda had a good understanding of the nature of the market, the characteristics of the average consumer and other matters affecting how the average consumer would react to the use of the proposed logos and, for my part, I adhere to the view that this is therefore very persuasive evidence of how the shaded logo mark is perceived.”

Issue: 7627 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll