Iconix v Dream Pairs [2025] UKSC 25
The Supreme Court unanimously overruled the Court of Appeal and allowed Dream Pairs’ appeal, holding that the Court of Appeal was not justified in substituting its own view in respect of the similarity and confusion assessments which had been made by the trial judge, in this trade mark infringement case. In doing so the Supreme Court discussed the principles and circumstances in which it is appropriate for the Court of Appeal to interfere with a first instance evaluative judgment. In addition, the Supreme Court considered and held that “realistic and representative post sale circumstances” can be taken into account for the purposes of assessing whether a sign and mark are similar and the extent of such similarity and further that post sale confusion without causing damage to the trade mark may give rise to an actionable likelihood of confusion, even where there is no likelihood of confusion at the point of sale.
Mark Vanhegan KC, led Theo Barclay of 4 New Square, instructed by Bird & Bird, acted on behalf of the successful appellants in the Supreme Court