Lifestyle Equities v SportsDirect: unregistered sub-licence losses still recoverable

What happened

Lifestyle Equities, which owns registered trademarks, had been fighting SportsDirect over trademark infringement for years. In a later stage dealing with how much SportsDirect owed in damages, Lifestyle Equities wanted to claim not just its own losses but losses suffered by companies it had sub-licensed to use its marks. The problem was that those sub-licences had never been registered on the UK trademark register, and the sub-licensees were not part of the court case. SportsDirect applied for summary judgment, asking the court to rule that none of those sub-licensee losses could be recovered at all.

What did the court decide in Lifestyle Equities CV v SportsDirect.com Retail?

The court held that losing the "protection of section 30" under section 25(3)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 is personal to the unregistered licensee. It does not take away the trademark owner's own right, under section 30(6), to have licensee losses taken into account when claiming damages. The court also found that sub-licensees cannot join the case as claimants themselves, except to step in under section 30(6A), and that there is no deadline for a licensee to register late. Late registration can still fix the licensee's own position going forward. SportsDirect's application failed.

What we learned from this

• What I'd take from this is that failing to register a trademark licence doesn't automatically wipe out a damages claim, but it does limit what the licensee itself can do about it. If you hold a trademark licence, registering it promptly protects your own position directly rather than relying on the owner to claim on your behalf. If registration was missed, this case suggests registering late can still help going forward, though it won't fix everything retrospectively. Trademark owners bringing infringement claims may still be able to include losses suffered by licensees further down the chain, even unregistered ones.

Things to be aware of

The businesses involved

What happened next

• SportsDirect, by then renamed Frasers Group Trading Ltd, appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal, which heard the case as Lifestyle Equities CV v Frasers Group Trading Ltd.Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website, May 2026

What others said about it

• Simmons & Simmons said the Court of Appeal's decision confirms that registering trademark licences is key to protecting a licensee's ability to recover losses.Source: Simmons & Simmons, June 2026
• Fieldfisher called the Court of Appeal's ruling a clear reminder that registering a trademark licence is necessary, not just administrative, to recover losses.Source: Fieldfisher, July 2026