easyDisputes

Hansel Henson has over 20 years of experience in successfully defending businesses against trade mark infringement and passing off claims by easyGroup Limited and its owner Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou.  More generally, we are expert in dealing with branding, copyright, trade mark and domain name disputes.  Our clients are varied, ranging from major global brands to fast growing start-up businesses.  We are recognised in a number of sections of the Legal 500 and Chambers directories, including for our trade mark work.

Over 20 years ago, our senior partner David Hansel, a recognised trade mark law expert, acted for Easyart in its successful defence of High Court proceedings brought by easyGroup.  Since then, he and the team at Hansel Henson have helped EasyPizza, Easyart, ezyVet, Easynet, Easy Villas Mallorca, Easy Live Auction and Easyfundraising defend themselves against attacks by easyGroup in the High Court and/or the UK IPO.  David and his team have been instructed by more than thirty other “easy” companies over the last 20 years.

easyGroup has had numerous significant losses in the High Court and the Court of Appeal in recent years.  Whilst easyGroup has not pursued claims against the vast majority of our clients, easyGroup has suffered court defeats against two of Hansel Henson’s clients, Easy Live Auction and Easyfundraising:

In 2018, easyGroup failed in its claim against EasyRoommate (see here).

In 2021, easyGroup’s claim against Easylife also failed (see here).  easyGroup appealed the decision, and then settled the matter – and as part of which they purchased Easylife’s trade marks.

In 2022, easyGroup failed to win its case against Easy Offices (see here and the appeal decision here).

Later that year, Hansel Henson’s client Easy Live Auction has successfully defended itself against two separate trade mark infringement claims brought by easyGroup (see here and here).  Whilst easyGroup enjoyed some extremely limited success in the first matter and its appeal in relation to some old logos, easyGroup has failed to stop Easy Live Auction trading under that name. Easy Live Auction were subsequently declared the "winners" and easyGroup forced to pay a proportion of Easy Live Auction’s costs. 

In 2023, easyGroup brought its second claim against Easy Live Auction based on its newly acquired Easylife trade marks – but once again failed to stop our client trading as Easy Live Auction (see here).

In a 2024 judgment, easyGroup failed to stop easyCOSMETIC from using that name (see here).

More recently, in 2024, Hansel Henson’s client Easyfundraising defended itself from a long-running attack on its use of the name and its logos (see here).  In fact, easyGroup had been sending threatening letters to our client over a time period of well over a decade before easyGroup eventually issued a claim against Easyfundraising in 2022.  Again, easyGroup lost and was ordered to pay costs on the indemnity basis.

In July 2025 the Court of Appeal dismissed easyGroup’s appeals against findings of no infringement of our client Easy Live Auction (see here), and our client Easyfundraising (see here) found no infringement and recognised that our clients are entitled to continue trading as ‘easyfundraising’ and ‘Easy Live Auction’.

In August 2025 the High Court has dismissed easyGroup trade mark infringement claim against Premier Inn Hotels (see here), which can continue to use its tagline “Rest Easy”.

No easy monopoly!

Following the remarkable success of easyJet, Sir Stelios sought to extend his “easy” brand to other businesses. His own businesses, mostly launched at the beginning of this century, such as easyEverything, easyDorm, easyCruise and easyCinema, are long forgotten flops.  Nothing has anywhere near matched the success of easyJet. 

After two decades of sending hundreds of cease and desist letters but rarely suing, easyGroup’s tactics changed.  From around 2017, Sir Stelios’ business model has been to bring proceedings against successful individuals or businesses already trading under a name beginning with the word “easy”, threatening and pursuing litigation against them, and then engaging with them through his lawyers, offering to withdraw from litigation if the target in question agrees to a sale and licence-back of their IP rights. 

Thus, companies such as Easy Networks, Easy Cleaning and Easylife have been sued in the High Court before agreeing to assign their IP rights to easyGroup and license back the name.  It is a novel, if expensive, way of pursuing a passion to own the word “easy” in relation to the sale of any type of good or service. 

The truth, however, is that nobody has – nor ever can – have a monopoly in the plain word “easy” in relation to all types of goods and services.  As has been found repeatedly by the courts, the word “easy” is a simple, descriptive English word.  It has been used descriptively by people and by businesses for centuries. We think that Sir Stelios's efforts to get a monopoly are bound to fail, but he continues to pursue them. There is also the suspicion that he is not implementing his royalty business model in a particularly easy way (doing business with someone who has sued you does not seem appealing).  However, until he retires, he remains a danger to anyone who trades with "easy" (or "ezy", "ezee" or any other similar word) at the start of their name.

Considering using the word easy in your Brand?

If you are thinking of using the word “easy” in relation to a business or product name, then you should think twice.  Firstly, easyGroup’s lawyers may well write to you threatening trade mark infringement!  They will often do this without any good reason. Secondly, because the word “easy” is so descriptive and very commonly used, you may find it will take a long time for your brand to become distinctive and memorable – consider opting for something less commonplace and descriptive for your business.

Sir Stelios has invested huge sums in his easyGroup project.  If you really must use “easy”, but want to reduce the chances of serious problems with easyGroup, avoid the elements included in their brand manual.

Received a letter?

You may be one of the hundreds of businesses who have received a letter alleging trade mark infringement and passing off from one of the firms of solicitors representing easyGroup and/or easyJet.  easyGroup has used numerous law firms over the years but currently their preferred firms appear to be, in London, Stephenson Harwood, Edwin Coe LLP, Kilburn & Strode, Potter Clarkson, Harbottle & Lewis, and as a result of Brexit, in Ireland (covering the EU) William Fry and Simmons & Simmons.  easyGroup has even brought claims in Florida.

If you receive such a letter from easyGroup's solicitors accusing you of trade mark infringement and passing off

We may be able to advise you, although we will need to run a conflict check and charge you for our advice.  We also accept instructions from other law firms who wish to maintain the relationship with their client but wish to have our expert advice.

Whilst nobody can have a total trade mark monopoly on the word easy, EasyJet and easyGroup do have rights that they are entitled to defend. easyJet is well known and distinctive, and no business should seek to mimic the distinctive easyJet get-up of orange and white, lower case ‘e’ and capitalised ‘J’, and Cooper Black font.  That is particularly the case if your business is in the travel sector.  So, there are certainly circumstances where they are entitled to stop those who misappropriate their valuable goodwill and confuse the public. If you are looking to rip off easyJet or easyGroup branding, then please do not contact us. Instead Google the case of Easyjet Airline Co v Dainty (t/as Easyrealestate), and think again!

If you’ve received a letter from easyGroup or are considering using “easy” in your branding, we may be able to help.  Please contact David Hansel at dah@hanselhenson.com or Will Holmes at will@hanselhenson.com.