Parliament’s court

As at present, English law does not have an unfair competition. No such tort has been inflicted on the United Kingdom by the European Community. However , as of date , in United Kingdom , unfair competition is being protected under various class of actions such as “classical economic torts”, passing off , ‘intellectual property torts’ and extended passing off. Thus, an action for the breach of trust can be made only under an unfair competition tort defence.

Thus, a tort sui generis intended at restraining uncharacteristic activities that harms the interest of the competitors so that they operate in tune with laws of competition. Moreover, the passage of the Trade Marks Act in 1994 has facilitated the industry in U. K to compel for creation of general right to prevent unfair competition . Free competition in business must be guarded by a guarantee that competitor’s play fair . The courts will be able to respond fittingly to the ever-changing multitude of technology trade.

Thus, the existing tort law will make the laws of the United Kingdom analogues with European Community law and will live up to the expectations of international communities. This research paper analyzes whether U. K is in need of an explicit unfair competition law or the extension of the unfair competition law will be meeting the requirements of United Kingdom. ANALYSIS: Non-existence of unfair competition law in United Kingdom is always lamented. The tort of unfair competition is the act of an individual, which unfairly, wrongfully and improperly creates damages to the other’s business values without good reason.

For proving unfair competition under tort laws, a plaintiff has to demonstrate that: the generations of trade values will be at jeopardize; There is an inadequacy or no other legal protection is unavailable. The awarding of a relief would reinforce ‘normally’ accepted social and commercial norms; The notion of free competition is not unnecessary encompassed and Awarding the relief is in the public interest. British Courts repugnance to tort of unfair competition shoots from an actual anxiety not to appropriate the powers of the Parliament.

Since the decision in INS case, the public policy issues like business morality are so complex that they call for Parliament approval. In De Beers Abrasive case it has observed that judge has to comment on unfair competition only when it happens to be absolutely necessary. In Pub Squash case, it was observed in an unfair tort advocature it was observed that the ball is now in Parliament’s court. In Ex parte Island Records Ltd, it was observed that creation of a property rights to royalties by an agreement to the performers is protectable from unfair competition.

In Pub Squash case, it was not possible to establish “trade mark” right in the advertisement of the product which rather authorized the pilfering of an advertisement promotion. As of date, the English law thwarts unfair competition in the following three principal means. Passing off: An action can be brought under passing off of Tort, if the plaintiff is able to demonstrate that respondent has is likely to mislead his customers by disclosing false information that his goods have close association with the plaintiff’s business. Inducing breach of contract and unlawful interferences with contractual relations.