Trade mark owners will find it more difficult to protect their brands from competitors’ comparative adverts following a Court of Appeal ruling, commercial firm Wedlake Bell is warning.
In Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd v Vetplus Ltd the court confirms that Human Rights Act 1998 freedom of expression provisions apply where courts are deciding whether or not to grant an interim injunction to stop circulation of a contentious advert quickly, pending trial. This means claimants will have to prove their case is “likely” to succeed before an injunction will be granted.
Mike Gardner, partner at Wedlake Bell, says the English courts have historically taken a robust approach to brand owners complaining about rivals’ advertising.
“This judgment may make it harder still for complainants to persuade the court to assist them in cases where urgent interim relief is sought,” he says.
Gardner adds that without an interim injunction, the advertiser is free to run the offending advert until the court makes a final ruling at trial, which may cause serious damage to the brand affected.
The case arose when pet medicine producer Boehringer sought an interim injunction to stop its rival Vetplus publishing an advert on nutritional supplements for dogs.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
