Michael Silverleaf QC (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP ) for the claimants; Geoffrey Hobbs QC and Emma Himsworth QC (instructed by Osborne Clarke ) for the first defendant.
On 21 May 2013 Arnold J concluded that the first defendant had infringed the claimant’s UK and Community trade marks: see [2013] EWHC 1291 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 206. On 23 May 2013 Arnold J heard argument on a number of consequential issues, including the form of an injunction sought by the claimant.
On the issue of broad matching without negative matching, the first defendant did “use” the sign “interflora”, albeit in a less direct way. On the specificity of the injunction, it would not be appropriate to depart from the established practice of the court in terms of the proportionality of general injunctions. The starting point was that the claimant was entitled to protection against further invasions of its trade mark rights. A general injunction would not be disproportionate or create a barrier to trade in the present case. On the geographical scope of the injunction, an EU-wide injunction was granted in respect of the Community trade mark.
Parliament and Council Directive 2004/48/EC, art 3(2)