IP analysis: The claimant’s application for an interim injunction in respect of a claim in passing off was dismissed. The court was not satisfied on the basis of the applicable American Cyanamid principles that an interim injunction should be granted. In particular, taking into account of: (i) the strength of the claimant’s case in respect of the shape (the ‘get up’) of its vodka bottles, (ii) the alleged evidence of confusion, and (iii) the likely adequacy of damages for the claimant but not the defendants, the court concluded that the balance of convenience tilted towards maintaining the status quo that existed at the time immediately prior to the issuing of the claim, rather that the date of the complaint letter. The judge rejecting the suggestion that this was a case where the defendant had pressed on with its alleged acts of passing off (the launch of its Ne10 vodka range)—in the face of the initial letter of complaint in order to secure an advantage in relation to the applicable status quo. Further to the claimant’s application, there was also a brief and what the judge described as an ‘informal’ application by the second defendant to have the claims against them struck out. The application was dismissed in part save in respect of those allegations that were founded solely in respect of acts said to be preparatory for passing off. Written by Dr Tim Sampson, barrister at Lamb Chambers.