Easygroup Limited v Easyfeetstore OÜ & Ors
Decision date: 1 April 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] EWHC 767 (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
easyGroup sued Easyfeetstore OÜ, Easyfeet Inc and Mr Klishyn alleging trade mark infringement and passing off based on multiple "easy" marks, and sought invalidation of the EASYFEET registration. The court found no likelihood of confusion under s.10(2) and no link, detriment or unfair advantage under s.10(3), rejected the family-of-marks and enhanced-distinctiveness arguments, and dismissed all claims and the invalidation application. The judge noted Mr Klishyn would have been jointly liable if infringement or passing off had been made out.
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
A mark element that is descriptive and lacks significant distinctiveness (here, "easy") will not on its own generate sufficient visual, aural or conceptual similarity to create a likelihood of confusion; enhanced distinctiveness or family status must be demonstrably supported by evidence of public recognition; and for s.10(3) claims, reputation alone is insufficient — there must be evidence of a perceptual link and of detriment or unfair advantage supported by evidence of changed economic behaviour or a probabilistic analysis. Proof of genuine use under s.11/s.46 requires solid documentary evidence of use for the relevant goods/services in the relevant period.
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 observed practical difficulties in proving a family of marks in contexts where many independent traders use the same descriptive element, and suggested that consistent house-style features (such as colour or font) might be needed to establish public recognition of a family. It also noted that absence of evidence of actual confusion can be a relevant factor where confusion would plausibly have emerged and been discoverable.