The Court found that City gents after a well cut shirt may be confused enough to instead enter a shop selling lingerie and clothes for college girls.  Justice Colin Birss ruled that US brand Victoria’s Secret infringed Thomas Pink’s trade mark in using the word PINK on its products.  He added that consumers might associate the upmarket tailoring brand with undergarments, which would cause a ‘detriment to the repute’ of the Thomas Pink brand.

Strongly associated

Victoria’s Secret’s argument that its PINK ladies fashion brand and Thomas Pink’s shirts both trade without issue in the US was not accepted, as the mark PINK is strongly associated with Thomas Pink in Europe.  The US brand expanded to the UK in 2012, opening PINK stores in London.  The Court assessed the likelihood of confusion in the UK market place only.

Further scrutiny

This issue of same names in wholly different sectors will now come under further scrutiny in the United States, where Chanel is suing an Indiana salon owner for trade mark infringement.  Gabrielle Bonheur Chanel has named her beauty parlour Chanel’s Salon, which the French company says infringes its trade mark.  Although personal names cannot usually be federally registered, there are exceptions where the name has acquired a secondary meaning, which stacks the odds against Ms Chanel.