Four decisions in as many months have been handed down in respect of easyGroup's trade marks, with two coming from the Court of Appeal.
All relate to claims brought by easyGroup for infringement of its trade marks. Despite some limited victories, easyGroup has faced some significant defeats, with only a few successful infringement arguments, and several of its trade mark specifications curtailed as a result of proceedings.
Together, these cases illustrate some fundamental challenges for brand owners who build their branding strategies around descriptive marks, and highlight the crucial importance that evidence can play in such cases. In particular, the courts tend to impose practical limitations when descriptive marks risk monopolising common language.
The decisions also reveal litigation's strategic value beyond traditional victories. easyGroup's settlement-and-license-back approach (where, as part of settling litigation brought by it, easyGroup would be assigned marks which were then licensed by them back to the previous owner) to acquiring rights in marks that it then relies upon to bring claims transforms litigation into IP acquisitions, expanding their portfolio, rather than merely stopping use.
easyGroup's mixed results across these cases underscore that, whilst courts remain willing to protect trade mark rights, they will distinguish between genuine consumer confusion and apparent attempts to claim monopolistic control over descriptive language. The decisions also emphasise the critical importance of building robust evidence of distinctiveness and consumer recognition, whilst maintaining realistic expectations about the scope of protection achievable in an increasingly competitive marketplace.
To read more about the individual cases, click on the links below.