header-logo header-logo

23 October 2014
Issue: 7627 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Trade mark dispute: Specsavers v Asda

Specsavers triumphs over Asda in logo trademark battle

Specsavers has triumphed in a five-year trade mark dispute with Asda over its overlapping ellipses logo, which resembles a pair of spectacles.

The dispute arose when Asda prepared marketing based on a similar shape. Specsavers contested this on the basis of trade mark infringement and passing off. The High Court found in favour of Asda and revoked Specsavers wordless trade mark on the basis of non-use since they always have the word “Specsavers” superimposed on them. The case has since been settled out of court, but Specsavers appealed the decision to revoke the wordless logo.

The Court of Appeal has now held that registration of the wordless logo should be reinstated, after referring the issue of non-use to the Court of Justice in Europe (CJEU).

Antony Gold, partner at HGF Law, who acted for Specsavers, says one important issue was whether the public “actually saw or perceived the wordless logo underneath. In this respect, Specsavers was able to point to evidence that, when formulating its marketing campaign, Asda’s marketing team had produced a series of potential logos it could use, each of which, to varying degrees, was modelled on Specsavers’ overlapping ellipses.” This evidence helped to demonstrate that the overlapping ellipses had a separate identity from the usual use of the ellipses with “Specsavers” superimposed.

Ruling in Specsavers v Asda [2014] EWCA Civ 1294, Lord Justice Kitchin said: “It is reasonable to suppose that Asda had a good understanding of the nature of the market, the characteristics of the average consumer and other matters affecting how the average consumer would react to the use of the proposed logos and, for my part, I adhere to the view that this is therefore very persuasive evidence of how the shaded logo mark is perceived.”

Issue: 7627 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll