AMS Neve Ltd & Ors v Heritage Audio S.L. & Anor
Decision date: 18 October 2016
Neutral citation: [2016] EWHC 2563 (IPEC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
The claimants (AMS Neve and BW Trustees) alleged Heritage Audio and its director sold goods in the UK under signs infringing two UK trade marks and an EU trade mark and committed passing off. The court held there was a good arguable case that Heritage Audio targeted/advertised/offered for sale in the UK so English courts have jurisdiction over the UK trade mark and passing off claims (including against the director as joint tortfeasor). The court concluded it lacked jurisdiction under the Trade Mark Regulation for the EU trade mark (Heritage being established only in Spain), so that claim was dismissed for want of English jurisdiction.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
For claims based on UK trade marks and passing off under Brussels I Article 7(2), jurisdiction may be founded either where the right subsists (place of damage) or where the event giving rise to the damage occurred (place of the event); a claimant must demonstrate a good arguable case that actionable acts (e.g. advertising/offers) occurred within the English jurisdiction. Under the Trade Mark Regulation Article 97(5), jurisdiction is interpreted independently and is generally confined to the Member State where the defendant committed the active conduct giving rise to infringement—here, Spain only—so English jurisdiction was not available for the EU trade mark.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment indicates (obiter) that in online cases the relevant “event” may be the advertiser’s decision/activation rather than mere technical display on a server, and that mere accessibility of a website in the UK is insufficient to establish targeting; factors such as site content, ordering/payment/dispatch arrangements, listed distributors, and visitor evidence are relevant to whether offers are targeted at UK consumers. It also notes national law can affect whether damage from acts outside the forum is regarded as damage within it.