Post-sale confusion: a doctrine in development

Abstract Post-sale confusion occurs when confusion occurs after the trade mark owner’s goods have been purchased. The status of such confusion under European Union trade mark law is unclear, with conflicting case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The UK courts have acknowledged the possibility of actionable post-sale confusion. However, in the past year, post-sale confusion has gained a higher profile, with its acceptance in two Court of Appeal decisions. The doctrine is controversial. In certain forms of post-sale confusion, while consumers may be confused, it is difficult to detect harm to the trade mark owner. It is questionable whether the law should step in in such cases. This article reviews the forms of post-sale confusion and the types of harm involved against the backdrop of the pending appeal to the Supreme Court in Iconix. It also argues that Brexit has enabled the UK courts to resolve ambiguities against the background of uncertain CJEU jurisprudence.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Published
2025-02-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpaf009
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Intellectual Property Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
15.98
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Post-sale confusion: a doctrine in development

Ilanah Fhima
1 citations
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Intellectual Property Law
15.98
article

Post-sale confusion: a doctrine in development

Ilanah Fhima
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Post-sale confusion occurs when confusion occurs after the trade mark owner’s goods have been purchased. The status of such confusion under European Union trade mark law is unclear, with conflicting case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The UK courts have acknowledged the possibility of actionable post-sale confusion. However, in the past year, post-sale confusion has gained a higher profile, with its acceptance in two Court of Appeal decisions. The doctrine is controversial. In certain forms of post-sale confusion, while consumers may be confused, it is difficult to detect harm to the trade mark owner. It is questionable whether the law should step in in such cases. This article reviews the forms of post-sale confusion and the types of harm involved against the backdrop of the pending appeal to the Supreme Court in Iconix. It also argues that Brexit has enabled the UK courts to resolve ambiguities against the background of uncertain CJEU jurisprudence.

Journal of Intellectual Property Law & PracticeVol. 20(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Intellectual Property Law
15.98
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Post-sale confusion: a doctrine in development — Ilanah Fhima · Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS