The easyGroup are well known for taking action against companies using the word easy within their branding. With their ever growing portfolio they are often successful in their actions.

In this particular case they took aggrievance to the use of easy by Premier Inn within their logo detailed below.

Background

Easygroup have amongst other marks, EASYHOTEL, easyHotel and REST EASY APARTMENTS. These were the rights that they relied on in the action that they took against Premier Inn.

Premier Inn have used the logo detailed above and the slogan “Rest easy” in their advertising campaigns since 2021. They ran a big advertising campaign in conjunction with the launch of the brand and therefore had significant publicity for it.

On 27 February 2023, easyGroup’s solicitors wrote to Premier Inn complaining about their use of “Rest easy” within their logo. Premier Inn refused to stop using the mark as they did not believe that the average consumer would draw an association with the easyGroup and therefore easyGroup issued proceedings for trade mark infringement and also made a claim for invalidity on 5 September 2023.

Proceedings and key points

The proceedings were heard in the High Court before Judge Lance Ashworth KC.

Easy marks

In this particular case the easyGroup did not want to rely on the “family of marks” principle. They did however rely on the reputation of the brand within the easyTravel Family, namely EASYJET, EASYCAR and EASYBUS. However, this was not sufficient to convince the judge that there would be a level of confusion by the average consumer.

It had previously been decided in various other easyGroup cases that the word “easy” on its own had no inherent distinctiveness and therefore the easyGroup has no rights in the word. Although the judge in this case was not bound by any previous decisions he also came to the same conclusion that “easy” has no inherent distinctiveness. This shows that despite their constant expansion and exposure of the easyGroup marks and branding, they still don’t have a monopoly over the word.

It could be argued that their reputation in “easy” is only prevalent if it is used alongside the colour orange. Without those two elements together the average consumer is unlikely to draw an association.

Survey evidence

In this case easyGroup requested to rely on survey evidence. The judge gave permission for this. During the proceedings Premier Inn criticized the surveys and what they were supposed to show. After reviewing the evidence to judge agreed that the survey evidence did not show what was requested. This demonstrates that even when initially approved by a judge, it is difficult to show value in survey evidence and subsequently provide the answers required from it. Some would argue that the disadvantages and potential pitfalls with survey evidence heavily outweigh the advantages.

Survey evidence can be very expensive to carry out. It should be done by a specialist company and the questions must be considered. They should be open questions that allow the recipient to express their full views and not lead them to a conclusion. This can be extremely hard to achieve, especially when you have an end goal in mind.

Timing of the proceedings

Another key point raised by the judge was the timing of the proceedings. It took two years from the launch of the Premier Inn Rest easy branding for easyGroup to contact Premier Inn. It then took a further 3 months before the letter before action was sent. The judge believed that this indicated there was no concern by the easyGroup or easy Hotel. If they had been concerned, action would have been taken upon launch of the new branding.

This demonstrates that if you believe there is a possible infringement or someone using a mark that you think is close to yours, you should raise it as soon as possible with the other side. Failure to do so may be considered as a lack of concern and potentially be detrimental to your case. If you notice a third party using something identical or similar to your mark, please contact our trade mark team who can assist and advise on a suitable way to proceed.

Decision

Overall, the judge agreed that there was a low level of similarity between the two marks. The judge agreed that the average consumer would not make a link between the Premier Inn’s signs and the easyHotel or “easy” trade mark. As such Premier Inn were successful in defending the claims against their mark.

Takeaways

This case has demonstrated some key points for trade mark law. The inclusion of survey evidence may get you the answers you want, however it is likely to come against some heavy criticism from the other side and possibly the judge. If it is going to be used it must be as robust as possible.

Timing is key. If you notice something that concerns you take action as soon as possible. The delay could be detrimental to your case.

Finally, just because you have a common element in all your marks doesn’t mean you have a monopoly over that particular word. It has been concluded on several occasions now that the easyGroup do not hold rights in “easy” on its own, which seems like a sensible conclusion by all the judges involved! The decision may have been different if Premier Inn decided the change their branding colour to orange.

If you have any questions on the points raised in this article please contact our trade mark team who will be able to assist you.