Iconix Luxembourg Holdings SARL (Respondent) v Dream Pairs Europe Inc. and another (Appellants)

Hearing listed

Case summary
Appeal
Change log

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2024/0032

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) Dream Pairs Europe Inc. (2) Top Glory Trading Group Inc

Respondent(s)

Iconix Luxembourg Holdings SARL

Issue

Was the Court of Appeal right to conclude the trial judge’s conclusion on the similarity of logos was “rationally insupportable”? At what point of time should the confusion of consumers be assessed in a claim for trade mark infringement? What approach should the court take when assessing whether trade marks are similar?

Facts

Iconix owns the sportswear brand Umbro and is the registered proprietor of two trade marks. The appellants own the footwear brand Dream Pairs and are the registered proprietors of two trade marks. The Dream Pairs trade marks which do not feature the words “Dream Pairs” are referred to as the “DP Logo”. Iconix sued Dream Pairs for trade mark infringement on the basis that their use of the DP Logo infringed the Umbro trade marks as it was confusingly similar. Iconix’s claim was dismissed by the High Court. Iconix appealed to the Court of Appeal, which allowed the appeal. The Court of Appeal held that the High Court’s finding that there was a very faint degree of similarity between the Umbro mark and DP Logo was rationally insupportable. It considered that there was a moderately high level of similarity between the logos, specifically when third parties are looking down at the logo on the side of an item of footwear, and therefore there was a likelihood of confusion between the logos. Dream Pairs now appeal to the Supreme Court.