|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions >> Thomas Pink Ltd v Victoria's Secret UK Ltd  EWHC 3258 (Ch) (31 July 2014)
Cite as:  EWHC 3258 (Ch)
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
COMMUNITY TRADE MARKS COURT
The Rolls Building
7 Rolls Buildings
London, EC4A 1NL
B e f o r e :
| THOMAS PINK LIMITED
|- and -
VICTORIA'S SECRET UK LIMITED
1st Floor Quality House, 6-9 Quality Court, Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1HP.
Telephone No: 020 7067 2900. Fax No: 020 7831 6864
MISS EMMA HIMSWORTH QC (instructed by Mischon de Reya ) appeared for the Defendant.
Crown Copyright ©
MR. JUSTICE BIRSS:
DRAFTING OF THE INJUNCTION
"Provided that the use of the sign 'VICTORIA'S SECRET PINK' where all three words are in the same font and size, spaced equally and given equal prominence, is not within the scope of the foregoing injunctions or either of them".
That is the proviso. The point is that in the judgment I held that the only use made of the phrase VICTORIA'S SECRET PINK in lockup format, which is what that proviso refers to, was on a Facebook page belonging to the defendant or another member of the same Victoria's Secret group. I held that that Facebook page was not directed to the EU and, accordingly, whatever is on it cannot infringe either the UK trade mark or the CTM.
ISLAND RECORDS v TRING
STAY OF ISLAND RECORDS v TRING DISCLOSURE
"In any case where a costs management order has been made, when assessing costs on the standard basis, the court will –
(a) have regard to the receiving party's last approved or agreed budget for each phase of the proceedings; and
(b) not depart from such approved or agreed budget unless satisfied that there is good reason to do so.
(Attention is drawn to rule 44.3(2)(a) and rule 44.3(5), which concern proportionality of costs.)"