Sky v SkyKick: court refuses to send EU law question to Europe before trial

What happened

Sky sued SkyKick for trademark infringement and passing off over its use of the name SkyKick. SkyKick fought back on two fronts. First, it wanted the High Court to ask the EU's top court whether an EU law change was valid, a change that had restricted a defence letting a business use its own name, but only for individuals, not companies like SkyKick. Second, SkyKick was separately trying to get Sky's trademarks declared invalid at the EU's trademark office, arguing they were too vague and registered in bad faith.

What did the court decide in Sky v Skykick UK?

The judge found both sides had properly arguable positions on whether the EU law restricting the own name defence to individuals was valid, but declined to refer that question to the CJEU (the EU's Court of Justice) before trial. The reasoning was that the case might be resolved on other grounds entirely, such as the real scope of Sky's trademarks or whether SkyKick's conduct met the test of honest business practices, without needing a ruling on the EU law point at all. The court also held there were special grounds under Article 104 EUTMR (EU trademark regulation) to let the UK case continue despite a parallel invalidity challenge pending at the EU trademark office.

What we learned from this

• What I'd take from this is that courts don't always rush to ask Europe or any other higher authority to settle a legal point early, especially when the facts of the case might make that question unnecessary.
• If you're defending a trademark claim, establishing the facts at trial can sometimes resolve things without needing a ruling on a disputed point of law.
• Parallel challenges, one in court and one at a trademark office, don't automatically mean the court case has to pause and wait.

Things to be aware of

The businesses involved

What happened next

• The CJEU later gave a preliminary ruling on the validity and clarity of Sky's trademark specifications, as recorded in the EU court's own case record.Source: Eur Lex
• The dispute continued in the English courts, with the High Court in 2020 ruling on how far Sky's trademark specifications should be limited and on infringement, according to Thomson Reuters Practical Law.Source: Practical Law (Thomson Reuters), April 2020
• The litigation ultimately reached the UK Supreme Court, which in November 2024 ruled on whether Sky's broad trademark registrations had been applied for in bad faith, as reported by IPKat.Source: IPKat, November 2024
• Following the Supreme Court's 2024 judgment, the UK Intellectual Property Office issued updated guidance for trademark applicants on how bad faith principles from the case apply to new applications, per GOV.UK.Source: Gov, June 2025
• Commentators noted that English courts began applying the Supreme Court's findings to trim overly broad trademark specifications in subsequent cases, according to The Global Legal Post.Source: The Global Legal Post, September 2025