Trade mark and passing off disputes

A trade mark may be registered or unregistered. Its essential function is to be a badge of origin distinguishing the goods and services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. In order to fulfil this function, a trade mark needs to be distinctive. Disputes arise when a third party uses a trade mark that is too close to an existing trade mark, potentially resulting in consumer confusion and erosion of that essential distinctiveness.

Generally speaking, trade mark and passing off disputes go hand in hand. It is common for a claimant asserting that its registered trade mark has been infringed to include an allegation of passing off, at least initially.

For more information, see Practice Notes:

•
Trade mark infringement—UK
•
Passing off—goodwill, misrepresentation and damage
•
Trade mark and passing off disputes—a practical guide

For more information about how trade mark rights relate to other IP rights, see Practice Note: IP right comparison table.

Registered trade marks in the UK

The law relating to UK trade mark registrations is set out in the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest IP News

Bayer retains Xarelto profits earned during sales ban

Law360, London: A London court ruled on 1 September 2025 that Bayer retains the profits it made from selling blood-thinning treatment Xarelto during an interim sales ban that prevented generic-drugmakers infringing the now-revoked patent.

The trade mark licensing ‘black hole’ (Lifestyle Equities v Sportsdirect)

IP analysis: This case is of interest to trade mark lawyers who advise clients on and litigate trade marks, particularly where the trade marks are licensed. In the UK, trade mark licenses can be registered, which confers benefits on the licensee, but there are also more subtle benefits for the licensor, which are explored in this judgment. Although the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994) sets out the rules of the statutory licensing scheme, its effects and who it applies to, practical questions can and do arise. This case provides a close analysis of the scheme, and answers three discrete questions. First, sub-licensees of an exclusive license need not necessarily be registered to recover damages; second, non-exclusive sub licensees may not be joined to proceedings; and third, while late registration of a licence can cure non-registration, there are significant safety mechanisms to prevent over-recovery or improper recovery of damages. Written by Sam Fisher, associate at CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP.

UK music collective wins action to halt mass claim over ‘black box’ royalties

MLex: A planned mass claim against a UK music copyright collective over alleged unfair distribution of royalty payments won’t be allowed to go to trial, judges at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled today. David Rowntree, known as the drummer from British rock band Blur, had sought compensation from the Performing Rights Society (PRS) for thousands of songwriters over ‘black box’ royalties—ones that can’t be matched and paid to the correct artist.

UPC won't refer costs questions to top EU court

Law360, London: The Unified Patent Court (UPC) said 20 August 2025 that it cannot refer questions of its framework or procedures to the EU's top court, ruling that such issues fall outside the EU's jurisdiction.