menu
Our EU and Competition Law, Litigation and Dispute Resolution, Commercial Property, Corporate and Commercial, and corporate teams are nationally recognised – including by Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners – all our solicitors provide excellent advice to a loyal client base.
Julian Maitland Walker is recognized by the Legal 500 as “undoubtedly the best competition lawyer in the region”More info
LIFESTYLE EQUITIES CV v ROYAL COUNTY OF BERKSHIRE POLO CLUB CASE NO. IL-2018-000115, [2023] EWHC 1839 (Ch) BACKGROUND The Claimants, Lifestyle Equities CV and an associated company, owners of the Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) brand brought an action against the Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club (RCBPC), its directors, its former licensing agent, the director of that former licensing agent and six overseas companies (some of which were current or former licensees of RCBPC) operating in Chile, Panama, Peru, Mexico and the UAE (together “the Overseas Territories”) for infringement of the BHPC registered trade mark in the UK, EU and the Overseas Territories. BHPC’s principle claim was that the RCBPC marks, both depicting a polo rider on a horse (including that at fig. 1 below), were confusingly similar to the BHPC mark (fig. 2 below) which also depicting a polo rider on a horse. BHPC sought an injunction and damages in respect of RCBPC’s use of its marks which it said constituted trade mark infringement under section 10(2) and 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (“TMA”). (“the RCBPC Mark”) Fig. 1 [A black and white logo with a person on a horse Description automatically generated] (“the BHPC Mark”) Fig. 2 This case is one of many infringement claims brought by BHPC in the UK and internationally in a campaign to try to monopolise the use of the polo horse and rider logo for a range of consumer products against RCBPC and other owners of polo related brands. BHPC accepted that, of the polo themed clothing brands in the market, the Ralph Lauren Polo brand is number 1, US Polo Association is number 2 and they then asserted that the BHPC brand was number 3. BHPC claimed that these three brands are able peacefully to co-exist in the market but brought the claim against RCBPC because they argued that there exists a likelihood of confusion between the RCPBC brand and the BHPC brand. It follows a string of similar claims against Greenwich Polo Club and Santa Monica Polo Club. His Honour Mr Justice Mellor (“the Judge”), giving judgment, summarised his task as follows, “Although this case can be decided with an application of established principles, it does raise in stark form the scope of protection which is or should be afforded to a registered trade mark which is used in a crowded market, i.e. a market in which there are several trade marks using similar motifs and which incorporate the same or similar words.” Given that the claim involved allegations of infringement in the UK, EU and the Overseas Territories, the parties, facing the complexities of a multi-jurisdictional claim had agreed that all allegations of trade mark infringement be determined by the application of EU/UK law so as to simplify matters and avoid the need for extensive evidence of foreign law.
Read more
Maitland Walker LLP has announced its 2023 promotions; Anna Neil, a private client lawyer working on both contentious and non-contentious matters based in the firm’s Taunton office has been promoted from Senior Associate to Partner, Ella Parsons, a property lawyer based in the firm’s Minehead office has been promoted to Senior Associate, and; Joe Siman, a competition/commercial lawyer working on both contentious and non-contentious matters has been promoted to Associate Solicitor.
Read more
Maitland Walker secures further recognition of their expertise in competition law by winning the GLE (Global Law Experts) law firm of the year 2023 for competition law (England).
Read more