Impact of the Withdrawal Agreement on EU Trade Mark Jurisdiction: SkyKick UK Ltd v Sky Ltd & Ors [2024] UKSC 36

Introduction

The case of SkyKick UK Ltd & Anor v Sky Ltd & Ors ([2024] UKSC 36) presented before the United Kingdom Supreme Court addresses critical issues arising from the UK's withdrawal from the European Union, particularly focusing on the jurisdiction over EU Trade Marks in pending legal proceedings. The primary parties involved are SkyKick UK Ltd and Sky Ltd, with the crux of the dispute revolving around the interpretation and application of the Withdrawal Agreement and its subsequent impact on the enforcement and validity of EU trade marks within the UK legal framework.

Summary of the Judgment

The Supreme Court, through the concurring opinion of Lord Reed, upheld the decision to allow ongoing legal proceedings concerning EU trade marks that were instituted before the end of the transition period (31 December 2020). The court emphasized that, according to the Withdrawal Agreement and the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 as amended by the 2020 Act, existing EU trade mark regulations retain their applicability in the UK for such pending cases. Despite arguments from Sky Ltd regarding the repeal of certain provisions that designated UK courts as EU trade mark courts, the court reaffirmed that these provisions continued to hold sway over proceedings initiated prior to the transition period's conclusion. Consequently, the High Court retained jurisdiction to determine the validity and infringement of EU trade marks beyond the UK’s territorial boundaries as originally stipulated under EU law.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references Kay v Goodwin (1830) 6 Bing 576 to support the principle that subordinate legislation is typically repealed by the repeal of the authority under which it was made, unless explicitly stated otherwise. This precedent was pivotal in addressing Sky Ltd's argument that the repeal of section 52 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 implicitly repealed the Community Trade Mark Regulations 2006, which designated UK courts as EU trade mark courts.

Legal Reasoning

Lord Reed’s reasoning centers on the interpretation of the Withdrawal Agreement and its embedding within UK domestic law through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and its subsequent amendment by the 2020 Act. The court analyzed section 7A of the 2018 Act, highlighting its role in ensuring that remedies and procedures under the Withdrawal Agreement are recognized and enforceable in UK law without further enactment. This provision mirrors the European Communities Act 1972's approach to EU law but is tailored to the post-Brexit context.

The judgment scrutinizes paragraph 20 of Schedule 2A to the Trade Marks Act 1994, elucidating how it preserves the jurisdiction of designated EU trade mark courts in the UK for proceedings pending as of IP completion day. This meticulous approach ensures continuity and legal certainty, preventing the retroactive nullification of trade mark rights and obligations established under EU law.

Impact

This landmark judgment solidifies the stability and predictability of ongoing EU trade mark cases in the UK post-Brexit. By affirming the applicability of EU trade mark regulations to cases initiated before the end of the transition period, the Supreme Court mitigates potential legal uncertainties and disruptions in intellectual property law enforcement. Future cases involving EU trade marks will continue to benefit from the established jurisdictional clarity, fostering an environment conducive to business and legal consistency.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Withdrawal Agreement

The Withdrawal Agreement is a treaty that outlines the terms of the UK's exit from the EU, ensuring that existing EU laws continue to apply in the UK for ongoing matters at the time of Brexit. It serves to maintain legal continuity and prevent sudden legal changes from affecting pending cases.

European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018

This act transposes the Withdrawal Agreement into UK law, ensuring that EU regulations relevant at the time of Brexit remain enforceable in the UK even after its departure from the EU.

EU Trade Mark Regulation

Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 is an EU-wide regulation that governs the protection and enforcement of EU trade marks, ensuring that a trade mark registered in one EU member state is protected across all member states.

IP Completion Day

IP Completion Day refers to the date when the transition period ended (31 December 2020), and the UK’s legal framework for intellectual property rights transitioned from EU to UK law.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's judgment in SkyKick UK Ltd v Sky Ltd & Ors underscores the judiciary's role in upholding legal continuity amidst significant constitutional changes like Brexit. By affirming the continued jurisdiction of UK courts over EU trade mark matters for cases initiated before the transition period's end, the court has reinforced the principles of legal certainty and the rule of law. This decision not only resolves the immediate dispute but also sets a clear precedent for handling similar cases in the future, ensuring that businesses and legal entities can operate with confidence in the post-Brexit legal landscape.