Airline founder Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou ‘deeply unimpressive witness’ – judge

Mrs Justice Bacon said Sir Stelios gave answers “that were defensive to the point of implausibility” when cross-examined at a recent High Court trial in London.

The judge said she “unfortunately” had to conclude that she could place very little weight on his evidence – “save where” it was “corroborated by other evidence”.

She outlined her views on Wednesday in a ruling on the dispute, which involved Sir Stelios’s easyGroup, and focused on a business he had launched more than a decade ago called easyOffice.

EasyGroup had claimed “infringement” of “registered trademarks in the name EASYOFFICE” and accused a company called Nuclei, which is involved in advertising or brokerage of serviced office space, of “stealing our brand”.

The judge made findings in favour of Nuclei.

She said Nuclei’s use of easyOffice signs did not infringe easyGroup’s trademarks and said four easyGroup trademarks should be revoked on the “grounds of lack of genuine use”.

“When cross-examined, Sir Stelios was revealed to be a deeply unimpressive witness,” said Mrs Justice Bacon, who oversaw hearings between December and early April.

“He was argumentative, giving answers that were defensive to the point of implausibility, and repeatedly contradicted points set out in one or other of his witness statements.

“It was clear that he had a poor recollection of the events that formed the background to these proceedings.

“It also became evident that his most recent witness statement contained substantial material that… was not within Sir Stelios’ personal knowledge and recollection, but was instead drafted by his lawyers, giving evidence of points on which Sir Stelios had no clear recollection whatsoever.

“In those circumstances I unfortunately have to conclude that I can place very little weight on evidence save where it is corroborated by other evidence in the case, including contemporaneous documents.”

EasyGroup had taken legal action against Nuclei, which is within a group called IWG.

Mrs Justice Bacon said the dispute had a “significant personal element”.

Sir Stelios believed that he “was betrayed” by “former friend” Mark Dixon, chief executive of the IWG group.

The judge said Sir Stelios had said he hoped to partner with Mr Dixon’s group in an “easyOffice venture” and had shared significant details about his proposed business model with Mr Dixon.

She said Mr Dixon’s group had decided to acquire a minority shareholding in Nuclei, rather than pursue a joint venture with easyGroup in the “market for office space rental”.

“It is not necessary for me to make any findings as to Mr Dixon’s motivations in deciding not to progress a joint venture with Sir Stelios, but to purchase Nuclei instead,” the judge added.

“Suffice it to say that Sir Stelios regarded that decision as a betrayal and believes that Mr Dixon acquired Nuclei in order to frustrate Sir Stelios’ own ambitions for the easyOffice business.”

Nuclei had been set up in 1999 and acquired the domain name www.easyoffices.com in 2000, said the judge.

Lawyers representing Nuclei argued that Nuclei had “traded as Easy Offices” continuously since around March 2000.

Mrs Justice Bacon said, following the launch of easyJet in 1995, Sir Stelios had “embarked upon various other business ventures” that used the “easy” branding.

“The idea for easyOffice appears to date back to around autumn 2002,” she said.

“EasyGroup did not, however, take concrete steps to launch the easyOffice business until the  summer of 2006.”

EasyOffice was initially a “popular and successful” business said the judge.

But she said, by 2012, the “tide had turned” and customer numbers were decreasing.

“EasyOffice Limited had been renamed Mega Office Limited in July 2011; in July 2012, a voluntary liquidator was appointed for the company, and the company was finally dissolved in December 2014,” the judge added.“

“While the easyOffice trademarks remained in the hands of easyGroup, the extent to which those marks continued to be used by easyGroup is an important issue in dispute in these proceedings.”

The judge said there had been “side-by-side use” of “marks/signs” over five years.

She said the “absence of any concrete evidence of confusion” indicated that “confusion was not in fact likely”.

The judge said she had concluded that four easyGroup trademarks should be “revoked for non-use”.

She said  Nuclei’s use of “EASYOFFICE signs did not infringe easyGroup’s marks”.