Application to restrain termination of trademark licences refused as court finds written agreement permitted 30-day notice

The High Court refused an application by two retail companies for interlocutory injunctions to restrain the owners of a bedding and furniture brand from terminating trademark licence agreements and from granting licences to third parties in their claimed territory. The judge held that the plaintiffs had signed a written agreement allowing for a 30-day no-fault termination and failed to produce credible evidence of additional assurances or a broader exclusive territory. The plaintiffs’ arguments regarding collateral purpose, estoppel, and standing of the new trademark licensee were rejected as unsubstantiated. The judge found that potential losses arising from rebranding and business disruption could be quantified in damages and did not warrant injunctions. The court reserved the costs to the trial, noting that while the plaintiffs failed at the interlocutory stage, they may yet obtain new evidence relevant at trial.