easyGroup Limited v Jaybank Leisure Limited

Decision date: 21 November 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] EWHC 3077 (IPEC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 Jaybank for trade mark infringement over Jaybank's use of EASIHIRE. The judge found the signs aurally and conceptually identical and that, but for a successful non‑use defence, Jaybank's use would infringe easyGroup's black & white EASYHIRE registration. The claim was dismissed because easyGroup failed to prove genuine use of the registered mark for the relied services in the relevant five‑year period and could not rely on use begun within the three‑month proviso. No enforceable injunction or other remedy was granted to easyGroup.

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

The binding reasoning in this judgment includes: (1) conventional use of a mark in a colour can count as use of a black & white registration for the purpose of s.11/A non‑use inquiries; (2) genuine use must be in relation to the specific goods or services for which registration protection is relied upon — use as an overarching brand/franchisor/technology provider does not automatically constitute genuine use of underlying franchisees' hire services; and (3) the s.46(3) three‑month proviso prevents reliance on use commenced within that three‑month period unless preparations for that use began earlier and are shown.

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 contains observations on easyGroup's strict brand presentation requirements (Cooper Black font, specific orange pantone and lower‑case "easy") and on the limited significance of font/capitalisation to average consumers. The judge also commented that an endless chain of linked websites should not be allowed to confer origin or guarantee of quality up the chain without clear consumer indication.