The Court of Appeal has rejected adidas’ attempt to overturn a 2024 High Court ruling that invalidated a number of its iconic “three stripe” position trade marks. Thom Browne, who had been sued by adidas for trade mark infringement in relation to the use of four stripes, had counterclaimed to invalidate adidas’ marks.
The core problem for adidas was that the trade marks were not precise enough: if they were retained, adidas would be granted too broad a monopoly on the placement of three stripes on garments.
Adidas’ marks covered three stripes applied to various garments. Images and written descriptions sought to identify the positions and proportions of the marks. So called “position trade marks” must satisfy the criteria for valid trade marks, including being clear and precise and consisting of a single sign.
The High Court had previously decided that, as a result, adidas’ marks for the three stripes along the arm of a jacket, down the leg of a tracksuit, and along the side of a vest, were invalid. It is worth noting that only certain of adidas’ position marks were found invalid. Its registrations for the three stripes as they appear on trainers, for example, were held to be and remain valid.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court’s earlier decision, concluding that adidas’ trade marks did not identify a single and clearly defined sign and were uncertain.
To be valid, a trade mark must unmistakably define its own monopoly. This clarity, the Court said, is crucial so that competitors and consumers can understand where the boundaries of a trade mark’s protection lie. As adidas’ position marks left room for variation in the possible placement and proportions of the three stripes on the garments, they did not meet this requirement.
This decision highlights the importance of precision when applying to register trade marks, and, particularly, position marks which (as the name suggests) get their distinctive character in part from clearly defined positioning. The High Court had been correct to decide that a trade mark cannot grant a broad monopoly over ambiguous variations of the placement of a design, as that uncertainty gives the trade mark owner an unfair advantage of its competition.
Brand owners, in the fashion industry and otherwise, who rely on position marks should carefully review their portfolios to ensure that each registration clearly reflects the exact way in which the mark is used and is precise. When filing for new trade marks, brands should ensure that the representations and descriptions of the marks are highly specific about where and how the mark appears on a product. General or decorative motifs, such as three stripes, cannot be broadly protected unless their representation in the trade mark application is precise and unambiguous.
Shireen advises on all types of intellectual property, with a particular emphasis on pragmatic and cost effective disputes and strategic advice. She also provides advice on the protection of IP, IP audits, the exploitation and disposal of IP and the management and enforcement programmes Her 30 years’ experience means that she is a trusted adviser to many leading businesses and has deep and strong experience in a number of sectors and issues.
Shireen works with clients in a wide range of sectors, including FMCG, retail, fashion, film, TV and theatre, publishing, music, video games and travel. She has a particular interest in the publishing industry (advising a number of leading publishers, authors, literary estates and content platforms) and in cutting edge issues such as the intersection between AI and IP.
Shireen has been listed as both a recommended IP lawyer and a recommended publishing lawyer by Chambers and The Legal 500 for many years. She has been ranked by IP Stars as a 'Top 250 Women in IP 2025', 'Trade mark star 2025', and 'Transactions Star 2025'.
Shireen was a council member of the Advertising Standards Authority, adjudicating on advertising complaints, for six years. She currently sits on the Portman Group Independent Complaints Panel and the Games Rating Authority Appeals Panel.
She handles both contentious as well as non-contentious matters, and has particular expertise in representing clients in proceedings at the UK Intellectual Property Office.
Filippa provides strategic advice to clients of all size from a wide range of sectors. She helps startups with clearing and selecting new trade marks, as well as working directly with world-famous brands to assist with the management and maintenance of their global trade mark portfolios.
Filippa has a special interest in the fashion and retail sectors, as well as the music and entertainment industries.
Noonie advises on a range of intellectual property disputes relating to trade marks, passing off, copyright and design rights, acting for clients across a broach range of sectors. She has experience advising clients at each stage of a dispute in proceedings before the UKIPO, IPEC and High Court.
In addition to her litigation experience, Noonie works with clients on all aspects of IP portfolio management and enforcement, with a focus on the retail, media, publishing, music consumer technology, and food and drink sectors.
Prior to joining Harbottle & Lewis in 2025, Noonie was an associate in the IP & technology litigation team at RPC, where she qualified in 2022.