Trunki Founder Won't Be Taken For A Ride!

D
Dehns

Contributor

Dehns logo
Dehns is a leading European firm of specialist patent and trade mark attorneys, with more than 200 people across seven offices, and with an internationally renowned reputation.
The Claimant, Magmatic Ltd., produces the now ubiquitous child's ride-on suitcase known as "Trunki®". Their founder, Mr. Robert Law, famously walked out of BBC's Dragon's Den empty-handed, but this did not hamper the success of the Trunki® case, which is now sold in 97 countries.
UK Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

High Court Decision - Trunki® v Kiddee Case (Magmatic v PMS)

The Claimant, Magmatic Ltd., produces the now ubiquitous child's ride-on suitcase known as "Trunki®".  Their founder, Mr. Robert Law, famously walked out of BBC's Dragon's Den empty-handed, but this did not hamper the success of the Trunki® case, which is now sold in 97 countries.

The Defendant, PMS International Ltd., produces a ride-on suitcase known as the Kiddee Case.

Magmatic filed a Community registered design ("CRD") on 20 June 2003.  The validity of the CRD was brought into question in relation to a disclosure of Mr. Law's earlier ride-on suitcase concept in an award ceremony in 1998.

Arnold J considered that, while this earlier concept was made available to the public, it would not have been possible for anyone who was not present at the ceremony to find out about it's existence.  As such, the "relatively obscure" prior disclosure did not form part of the design corpus of which the informed user would have been aware.  The CRD was therefore considered to be valid.

The scope of protection conferred by a Community Design extends to any design that does not produce on the informed user a different overall impression, taking into account the degree of freedom of the designer when developing his design.

Arnold J considered that, as the Trunki® case was the first child's ride-on suitcase, the designer had considerable design freedom and therefore the CRD should be entitled to a broad scope of protection.

The overall impression of the CRD was considered to be a slim, sculpted, sophisticated, modern appearance having animal-like parts.  The Kiddee case was considered to produce the same overall impression and therefore to infringe the CRD.

Arnold J also decided that four of the Claimant's unregistered design rights, relating to certain parts of the Trunki® case, namely the inner and outer straps and the clasps, were infringed.

Interestingly, this case was expedited, so that a decision could be given before the sector's lucrative summer holiday season.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Trunki Founder Won't Be Taken For A Ride!

UK Intellectual Property

Contributor

Dehns logo
Dehns is a leading European firm of specialist patent and trade mark attorneys, with more than 200 people across seven offices, and with an internationally renowned reputation.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More