May 9, 2025
Makeality Ltd (the “Claimant”), the company behind the “Piddle Patch” indoor dog house-training product initiated legal proceedings in the High Court against City Doggo Ltd (the “Defendant”) and its Director, Laurencia Walker-Fooks, who marketed a similar product, over allegations of trade mark infringement and passing off. The Claimant seeks damages and an injunction to prevent the Defendant from marketing its product.
The case raises an important point question as to whether the claim should be allocated to the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (“IPEC”) small claims track, or if it should remain in the multi-track, as suggested by the Claimant.
High Court: for complex or high‑value cases; no upper cap on damages or costs.
IPEC multi‑track: simpler than High Court but capped at £500,000 damages, £60,000 costs.
IPEC small‑claims track: for claims under £10k – faster, lower fees, but no cost recovery.
The Claimant claims to have developed the concept of the product in 2016 and subsequently registered the trade mark “Piddle Patch” in the same year.
Rebecca Sloan, the founder of the Claimant, appeared on BBC’s Dragons’ Den in 2022, and secured a £50,000 investment from Steven Bartlett in her business which sells the “Piddle Patch” invention. The product is a biodegradable litter tray designed to replicate outdoor grass for house-training dogs indoors. Laurencia Walker-Fooks, operating through the Defendant, introduced a comparable product named the “Oui Oui Patch” in 2020.
The Claimant alleges that the Defendant’s product infringes upon its registered trade mark and constitutes passing off, as
i) the Claimant had established goodwill in its product, through marketing it since 2016
ii) the Defendant’s product could mislead consumers into believing the products are related
iii) which leads to potential loss in the Claimant’s sales.
The Defendant admitted to using variations of the term “Piddle Patch” in its marketing but ceased upon receiving complaints from the Claimant.
In simple terms, intellectual property (“IP”) infringement claims can be brought in the High Court, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (“IPEC”) or the Patents Court. However, each IP court can have its own benefits and costs for IP claims.
The IPEC is designed for smaller, less complex cases, with a cap of £500,000 on damages and £60,000 on recoverable costs (for the liability hearing). It offers a streamlined procedure with active case management, limited disclosure, and shorter trials, making it a cost-effective option for small and medium-sized enterprises and individuals. The IPEC also has a small claims track for claims under £10,000.
In this case, the Claimant appealed the Court’s decision to transfer the case to the IPEC’s small claims track after the Court determined that the Claimant had not substantiated a claim exceeding £10,000. The Court of Appeal upheld the transfer, emphasising that the Claimant failed to provide evidence supporting the higher value of the claim.
| Case Type | Best Forum | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Claim < £10k & simple | IPEC small-claims | Quick, cheaper, streamlined |
| Claim £10k–£500k or moderate complexity | IPEC multi-track | Fair cost cap, structured procedure |
| Claim > £500k or very complex | High Court | No damage cap but higher costs |
Cost-effective: faster, fewer procedural steps
Lower court fees
Limited disclosure and quicker resolution
Structured process with active case management
Damage cap £500k, costs cap £60k
Suited where claim value or complexity is clear and substantial
Necessary for very high-value or patent cases
No caps, but significantly more expensive and slower
————————————————————————————————————————–
A: Small‑claims suits claims under £10,000 with minimal process; multi‑track suits are for higher-value/complexity matters, with each track having different caps and procedures.
A: Small‑claims: generally no cost recovery, only court fees VS Multi‑track: capped recoverable costs (£60k total, £9k‑£30k per litigation stage)
A: No. You can start in High Court or IPEC. But courts can transfer cases based on value and complexity.
A: They provided no financial evidence exceeding £10k, and the judge agreed the case could be resolved in one day.
This case underscores the importance of protecting IP rights, particularly for entrepreneurs emerging from platforms such as Dragons’ Den. Trade mark infringement and passing off can have significant implications for brand identity and market position. The legal proceedings also highlight the challenges startups may face in enforcing their rights when the financial value of the claim is contested.
At Briffa, we have a wealth of experience across the IP spectrum. We can help you with enforcing your IP rights to aid your business’ expansion and advise on the financial value of your IP claim when taking legal action. Complete the contact form below or get in touch for clear guidance on your IP dispute forum.
Written by Prem Shah, Solicitor
We’ll start with a no obligation chat where we’ll get to know you and understand your current challenges.
Contact us now
