UK: New Law of Unfair Competition : Is it Necessary?

Last Updated: 2 December 1998
Proponents for a new law claim that a new law of unfair competition is necessary in order to ensure that we comply with our obligations under the Paris Convention. That may well be so. I do not know.

What really interests me is that many also argue that the current law is inadequate to deal with lookalikes. The law is too uncertain, so the argument goes, and it is too expensive.

Uncertainty

What is uncertain about the law? To succeed under Section 10(2) Trade Marks Act 1994 one needs a valid trade mark registration and one needs to be able to prove confusing similarity. Under the law of passing off one needs to be able to establish the classic trinity, namely goodwill, misrepresentation and damage. No uncertainty there - the law is clear. In copyright, again, the law is simple, it is unlawful to reproduce without permission a substantial part of a copyright work.

What they mean, of course, is that the outcome is sometimes difficult to predict - a very different matter. It is precisely the same uncertainty faced by a plaintiff trying to prove negligence, defamation, and breach of contract or, indeed, any other pleaded case. The uncertainty lies not in the law, but in whether or not one will be able to convince the court that one has a good case. The uncertainty may be as to the quality of one's evidence to support the case or it may be a concern that the judge will not view the case in the same way or it may be a combination of the two.

Why should brand owners be put in any more favourable position than plaintiffs in any other type of suit? A good reason might be that injustice is resulting. Look at all the lookalikes, they say. The supermarkets are running riot, our hard won brands are being diluted left, right and centre and we are powerless to do anything about it.

Oh, yeah? Show me a case where a brand owner has taken on a supermarket and lost. They can't. In over 25 years of supermarket lookalikes the best they can do is point to Penguin v. Puffin, where the passing off case was won and resulted in material changes to the get-up, but where the trade mark infringement case was lost. The fact that the defendant in that case continued to use the name Puffin had nothing to do with the lost trade mark case, but everything to do with the fact that the parties (trading partners) had had enough fighting and wanted to settle the case. It is invariably overlooked that when the judge made his order, the defendants asked for a variation confirming that they were entitled to use the brand name Puffin and the judge refused.

Where a law is severely defective, it is not difficult to point to meritorious cases, which fail; and it is usually possible to find judicial dicta supporting a change in the law. Take for example the Rank Film Distributors case on the plea against self-incrimination which led to Section 72 Supreme Court Act 1981; and the Amstrad case, which supported the music copyright owners' lobby for a blank tape levy. Strong judgments from Lord Russell and Lord Justice Nicholls (as he then was) in those cases provided powerful support for the aggrieved parties.

Where do we find equivalent dicta to support the push for a new law of unfair competition? Nowhere. In short, there is no uncertainty in the law and there is no injustice, which cannot be dealt with by the existing law.

Expense of litigation

The complaint that the law is too expensive is so outrageous as to take one's breath away. Let us look at who these poor impoverished would-be litigants are. They are almost invariably the mighty national and international brand owners. Supermarkets do not produce copycats of failed or even mildly successful brands. They only go for the mega brands. These are the plaintiffs who in other types of action find the expense of litigation an extremely useful ally. They are able to use the expense of litigation to frighten off the opposition. As soon as they are faced with opponents who have the financial muscle to stand up to them, litigation suddenly becomes too expensive.

Worse still, anybody who takes brand protection seriously knows perfectly well that a trade mark registration certificate is only the start. The brand needs litigation support as much as it needs advertising and promotion. The most expensive trade mark infringement and passing off action that I have ever conducted cost £550,000 all in. That is but a drop in the ocean compared with the money spent on advertising a leading brand of the kind likely to be a target for a supermarket.

Those who believe that litigation is too expensive completely fail to understand the role of litigation in brand support.

The truth, of course, is that the predicament that brand owners find themselves in has nothing whatever to do with the inadequacy or expense of litigation. It is simply that in this day and age, when institutional investors require immediate results, the long-term attention that brands require is a luxury that companies believe they can ill-afford. De-listing is the fear. Sales come first. The brand is of secondary importance. Suing one's principal customer is going to be a no-no for all but the most enlightened sales directors.

That is why brand owners have allowed the supermarkets to get away with murder. The decision is only a difficult one if the long-term interests of the brand are other than of paramount importance.

That consideration will continue to apply if and when the new law of unfair competition is enacted. A sales director is no more likely to want to accuse his principal customer of cheating him by way of unfair competition than he is of wanting to accuse him of cheating him by way of passing off.

When one comes to look at the new law that is proposed (WIPO model 3) one finds that all damaging acts of competition are acts of unfair competition.

"Any act or practice, in the course of industrial or commercial activities, which damages or is likely to damage the reputation or goodwill of another's enterprise, shall constitute an act of unfair competition ... whether or not such act or practice causes confusion."

Clearly, that cannot be right, so we are back to the courts to define the limits of the enactment. If anything, the new law is less certain than the existing law.

The ultimate and infuriating irony is that evidentially it ought to be easier to succeed in a passing off action against a supermarket lookalike, than in an action against a competitor's lookalike. The competitor's name on the pack may well counter any risk of consumer deception, whereas the supermarket's name is purely a retailer's mark and does not identify the manufacturer. It does not help the consumer identify the manufacturer.

In relation to the supermarket lookalike the brand owner has the benefit of the widely held consumer belief that the own label is made for the supermarket by the manufacturer of the market leader. As the judge found in Penguin v. Puffin the more "cues" the supermarket takes from the market leader, the more likely that that consumer perception will be fuelled. "On average nearly half of shoppers (47%) mistakenly believe a copy-cat is definitely or probably made by the brand manufacturer" states the Chairman of the British Brands Group. To a passing off litigator 47% is an astonishingly high level of confusion. Plaintiffs have got home in passing off on a fraction of that figure.

Conclusion

The British Brands Group campaign says it all. Not 47%, but total confusion. They push for a law that obviates the need for them to prove likelihood of confusion in order to win; simultaneously, they produce survey research to show stunningly high levels of confusion among consumers in relation to supermarket lookalikes; and their representative pressing their case in the House of Lords, Lord McNally, concludes his speech in the House of Lords debate "we are objecting to what has always seemed to me to be blatant passing off".

Quite so, my lord. The existing law of passing off is well-equipped to deal with blatant passing off. Try it and see. If a meritorious case is lost, then, but only then, will the proponents of the new law have a satisfactory platform from which to launch their campaign.

Dawn Osborne is a senior solicitor at Willoughby & Partners. Willoughby & Partners, in association with Rouse & Co International, have an active interest group devoted to legal issues relating to the Internet.
The content of this article is to provide only a general information on the subject. Legal advice should be sought for any specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.