Skip to main content

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe

Recommended for you

MotoGP Barcelona test: Acosta fastest as rain curtails running early

MotoGP
Barcelona Official Testing
MotoGP Barcelona test: Acosta fastest as rain curtails running early

Why this year's Indy 500 isn't as straightforward to call as you might expect

Feature
IndyCar
110th Running of the Indianapolis 500
Why this year's Indy 500 isn't as straightforward to call as you might expect

Will Mercedes or McLaren land the next punch at F1's Canadian GP?

Formula 1
Canadian GP
Will Mercedes or McLaren land the next punch at F1's Canadian GP?

The mental challenge Evans takes on at Rally Japan

WRC
Rally Japan
The mental challenge Evans takes on at Rally Japan

Why the Catalan GP chaos may finally force MotoGP riders to unite

Feature
MotoGP
Catalan GP
Why the Catalan GP chaos may finally force MotoGP riders to unite

Why Ford 'loves the V8 idea' in F1 amid changing road car strategy

Formula 1
Why Ford 'loves the V8 idea' in F1 amid changing road car strategy

What we learned from MotoGP's wretched Catalan GP

Feature
MotoGP
What we learned from MotoGP's wretched Catalan GP

How Verstappen's Nurburgring adventure marked the next phase of his legacy

Feature
GT
How Verstappen's Nurburgring adventure marked the next phase of his legacy

Marussia and Manor in trademark dispute over 2015 Formula 1 car

An application for summary judgement brought by Marussia against Manor Grand Prix Racing for trademark infringement by using its name during the 2015 Formula 1 season has been rejected

In legal documents seen by Autosport, the claim stated Marussia licensed the trademark to Manor to use as its Formula 1 team and chassis name, but that the licence came to an end on 31 December 2014.

It added Manor continued to use "Marussia" as the name of its Formula 1 team and chassis for 2015 after the outfit was saved from administration.

If Manor changed its chassis name from Marussia without consent from F1's commercial rights holder, it would lose entitlement to prize money based on previous seasons.

Manor has defended the claim on five grounds, firstly suggesting Marussia "impliedly consented" to the use of the trademark.

It added Marussia estopped, in other words "is barred", from asserting its rights as owner of the trademark.

Thirdly, it said the use of the trademark did not give rise to any "likelihood of confusion" on the part of the relevant public for the purpose of Article 9.1 (b) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation.

Manor added the trademark does not have "a reputation in the community" for the purpose of Article 9.1 (c) of the aforementioned regulation.

In the fifth and final defence, it said its use of the trademark constituted use of its own name "in accordance with honest practices" for the purpose of Article 12 of the regulation.

In conclusion, Mr Justice Males said Manor has "no real prospect" of proving that its use of the claimant's trademark was with the claimant's consent.

He concluded the estoppel defence is not available to Manor, and that it is "improbable" the trademark defences under Article 9 and Article 12 would succeed.

Males added there is power to make a conditional order requiring the defendant to provide security if it wishes to pursue those defences.

If Manor follows the path, security of £1.75million must be provided.

Manor must now decide whether it wants to pursue defences three, four and five.

The team has described Marussia's claims as "speculative" in a statement.

"Marussia put the company [the F1 team] into administration in 2014," a spokesperson told Autosport.

"We made an offer to acquire the team, including the chassis, which they readily accepted, perhaps assuming we would not be able to get the team up and running again.

"Now that we have, they have launched these speculative claims."

The document also stated the claimant has brought a claim of 'passing off' but that is not the subject of this application.

It also stated the defendant has a pending application to plead a counterclaim for declining to pay some £520,000 for sponsorship rights.

Previous article Hamilton says he promotes Formula 1 more than any other driver has
Next article Why Toro Rosso's other young gun can't be ignored

Top Comments

Latest news