Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
In the final chapter of the long-running trade mark dispute between Specsavers and Asda, the Court of Appeal upholds Specsavers’ logo trade mark (Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd v Asda Stores Ltd (Registrar of Trade Marks Intervening)  EWCA Civ 1294)
This case is the final chapter in long-running trade mark litigation following Asda’s 2009 advertising campaign for its optical services which used a double oval shaped green and white logo similar to Specsavers’ green and white double oval logo. Following a claim for trade mark infringement bought by Specsavers, the High Court ruled largely in favour of Asda (though there was one finding of trade mark infringement) (see Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd v Asda Stores Ltd  EWHC 2035 (Ch)). Not only did Specsavers lose on most grounds of their infringement claim, they also faced revocation of their wordless logo mark (below) on the basis of non-use.
The wordless logo mark
The shaded logo mark
The matter progressed to the Court of Appeal who gave judgment on various aspects of Specsavers’ appeal. On the issue of Specsavers’ appeal against the order for revocation of the wordless mark, and in respect of the allegation that Asda’s logo infringed the wordless logo mark, the Court of Appeal made a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (see Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd v Asda Stores Ltd (No 2)  EWCA Civ 494). The key issues before the CJEU were:
The CJEU’s ruling is summarised below and considered in more detail in Lexis®PSL IP&IT News Analysis: CJEU rules on short-sighted Asda ad campaign in continued battle with Specsavers.
Since the CJEU’s ruling in July 2013, the parties have settled their dispute but agreed that Specsavers was at liberty to pursue their appeal against the revocation order for the wordless logo issued by the High Court. This latest hearing solely concerned the wordless logo mark. Specifically, the Court of Appeal was to determine to what extent use of the shaded logo constitutes use of the wordless logo mark.
Going back to the CJEU ruling of July 2013, it ruled that the condition of ‘genuine use’ of a trade mark within the meaning of Regulation (EC) 207/2009, arts 1(1) and 51(1)(a):
‘[…] may be fulfilled where a Community figurative mark is used only in conjunction with a Community word mark which is superimposed over it, and the combination of those two marks is, furthermore, itself registered as a Community trade mark, to the extent that the differences between the form in which that trade mark is used and that in which it was registered do not change the distinctive character of that trade mark as registered.’ (para )
In other words, if a trade mark (in this case the wordless logo mark) has only be used as part of a composite mark (in this case the shaded logo mark), the use must nonetheless be such that the trade mark (the wordless logo mark) would, by itself, be perceived as an indication of origin. In addition, the CJEU ruled the court could take into account that the mark has always been used in a particular colour in so far as this relates to the perception of the mark by the average consumer.
In applying the CJEU’s ruling, the Court of Appeal concluded that use of Specsavers’ well-known shaded logo mark did indeed constitute genuine use of the shaded logo and therefore the mark should not be revoked.
Key to establishing validity of the wordless logo mark was assessing use of the shaded logo mark, counter-intuitive as this seems. The court made the following observations in relation to the shaded logo mark:
The court concluded that Specsavers had established that the wordless logo was, by itself, an indication of origin:
‘[…] the average consumer has perceived and does perceive the Wordless logo mark as indicative of the origin of the goods and services supplied by Specsavers. In short, much of that use has been such that the differences between the Shaded logo mark and the Wordless logo mark have not changed the distinctive character of the Wordless logo mark.’ (para )
General guidance to be gleaned from this case is limited. The Court of Appeal was careful to highlight the unusual circumstances of this case and avoided a suggestion that the Registrar of Trade Marks should now accept applications for commonplace outline shapes of logo marks. Indeed, it is difficult to think of many examples of a word imposed on a shape where the shape alone would be perceived as an indication of origin.
Jessica Stretch, solicitor in the Lexis®PSL IP & IT team. Originally published on WIPIT’s sister site, LexisPSL IP&IT.
0330 161 1234