< Zurück zu den aktuellen Neuigkeiten & Events

Retail Scanner

Everything but the…shops

April 2021

Over the last year, online retailers have been snapping up high street brands but not their stores. In February, Arcadia’s TOPSHOP, TOPMAN, MISS SELFRIDGE and HIIT brands sold to ASOS for £265 million, separate to the £65 million paid for current and future stock. In January, Boohoo purchased Debenhams’ brands and website for £55 million but noticeably did not take on its 124 stores.

Whilst this may be a concern for the British high street, it clearly demonstrates the value of brands, in some cases over any tangible assets such as stock, staff or physical stores. TOPSHOP and MISS SELFRIDGE are registered trade marks but additionally, through their use, have amassed substantial goodwill in the business connected to them. The repute and power of attraction of these brands is what drives up their purchase price – even when being offered up out of administration.

Against this backdrop, insolvencies, administration and acquisitions, it is more key than ever for retailers to have a handle on their IP. Knowing “what you’ve got” and “what it’s worth” should the administrators need to be called, or should a sale or purchase opportunity arise, is a stock take worth conducting for retailers reliant on their brands.

1. Take stock

Conducting a regular check of what IP is owned – namely, registered and “unregistered” trade marks, i.e. goodwill, registered and unregistered designs, copyright and patents – is the best way to avoid the pitfalls of poor portfolio management at any time. However, this becomes more crucial when looking for a buyer for any brand or considering an acquisition.

Companies with complex structures can have IP rights spread across group or subsidiary companies. Or, previous mergers or acquisitions may have resulted in IP rights being legally transferred to a new owner, but this transfer of ownership not recorded on the IP registers. Rapid growth, internal restructuring and simply poor organisation can also lead to IP portfolios becoming “messy”.

Taking the time to create a database of all registered and (as far as possible) unregistered rights, checking that these rights are in the hands of the right entity and, for registered rights, ensuring that this entity is recorded as the owner on the official IP Office database, is a useful asset in itself. Acquisitions are typically fast-paced in their nature, so having a reliable record of assets to offer up to a buyer would avoid slowing down any deal.

Additionally, from a purchaser’s perspective, receiving such a record with the assurances that this data is regularly checked and updated if needed, may compensate for the typical lack of warranties around the validity and enforceability of IP rights being purchased out of administration. It also enables a proper assessment to be made about the value of the IP rights being bought.

2. Take care with transfer

The value given to the IP rights is obviously crucial to such deals. However, the importance of this figure goes beyond both parties feeling as though they have settled on a fair price. If IP assets are sold at under value, the validity of their transfer can be challenged for up to two years (for companies) under the Insolvency Act and it could be argued as contrary to corporate governance. This issue is more likely to come in to play when IP rights are assigned within group companies. The temptation may be to include the nominal £1 consideration, but consulting with a brand valuation expert and inserting this figure into the agreement will ensure that the assignment is valid and irreversible should it ever be challenged in future.

As with any agreement, the definition of IP rights is also key. A buyer will likely want the wording to be as broad as possible to capture all IP in any format in all territories. This can be tricky when there is more than one buyer, each seeking to take parts of the portfolio. In this instance, a “catch all” definition referencing all of the IP rights of the seller may not be possible. Although, a well worded “further assurance” clause could provide some comfort. Including a clause that requires the administrators to sign any further documents required to transfer assets to the buyer or record the change in ownership, can avoid rights that may have been missed in the midst of the initial deal from remaining in limbo.

3. Who needs to be notified?

Once the transaction has been completed, the change of ownership of any registered IP rights should be recorded on the relevant registers. This can be a straightforward process if ownership of the IP when purchased was already up to date. It can become tricky if a backlog of transfers has built up. It may also be necessary to notify the entities of the other side of any co-existence agreements or licences connected to the newly purchased IP of the new ownership, if this was not already required prior to the completion of the deal.

Finally, whilst recordals may seem like an administrative task, should the new owner wish to rely on the newly acquired rights for enforcement, the register will need to properly reflect the chain of title and current ownership of the registration.

This article was prepared by HGF Trade Mark Director Lauren Somers.

Aktuelle Neuigkeiten

Empowered, Not Replaced: The Risks and Rewards of Using AI Tools in Patent Prosecution

With the rapid rise of AI and extreme hype around generative AI tools in the workplace, patent firms around the world have had to seriously consider to what extent they …

Weiterlesen

EU Agrees on NGT Plant Regulation: What It Means for Patents and Licensing

The European Parliament and Council have reached a provisional agreement for plants developed using New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) – below we summarise the main points and set out the requirements …

Weiterlesen

When Retail Branding Meets Politics

(Inter IKEA Systems v Algemeen Vlaams Belang (Case C‑298/23) In November 2022, the Flemish political party Vlaams Belang presented its “IKEA-PLAN – Immigratie Kan Echt Anders” (“Immigration Really Can Be Different”). …

Weiterlesen

Büro geschlossen – Dezember 2025 / Januar 2026

HGF Büro geschlossen – Dezember 2025 / Januar 2026   UK Donnerstag, 25. und Freitag, 26. Dezember 2025 GESCHLOSSEN Donnerstag, 1. Januar 2026* GESCHLOSSEN * Freitag, 2. Januar 2026 – …

Weiterlesen

Oft kopiert, nie erreicht: Wann werden Alltagsgegenstände zum Gegenstand des Urheberrechts?

Die Grenze zwischen „reinen“ Kunstwerken und bloßen Gebrauchsgegenständen – Können ikonische, aber alltägliche Produkte urheberrechtlich geschützt werden? Die obige Frage wurde vom Generalanwalt in den verbundenen Rechtssachen C‑580/23 und C‑795/23 …

Weiterlesen

T 0883/23: Dosierungsansprüche und ihr Anspruch auf Priorität, wenn in der Prioritätsanmeldung nur das Protokoll der klinischen Studie offengelegt wurde

In einer kürzlich ergangenen Entscheidung der Beschwerdekammer (BoA) des EPA entschied die BoA, dass Ansprüche, die auf eine Kombination von pharmazeutischen Wirkstoffen (APIs) in bestimmten Dosen gerichtet sind, keinen Anspruch …

Weiterlesen

Das Ende des Brexit-Überhangs für Marken: Überprüfung, Neuanmeldung und Widerruf.

Am 31. Dezember 2025 sind fünf Jahre seit dem Ende der Brexit-Übergangsperiode am 31. Dezember 2020 vergangen. Warum ist das relevant? Für im Vereinigten Königreich geklonte Markenregistrierungen, die infolge des …

Weiterlesen
Event - 14. Januar 2026

Seminar über Die Folgen von G1/24 – hat sich etwas geändert?

HGF veranstaltet ein Seminar zum Thema Die Folgen von G1/24 – hat sich etwas geändert? Im Anschluss daran folgen Networking, Apero und Snacks. Das Seminar findet am Mittwoch, den 14. …

Veranstaltungsdetails