Ferrari Loses Lawsuit Against Malaysian Energy Drink Over Identical Logo
The High Court ruled that the drink's logo was not confusingly similar to Ferrari's iconic Prancing Horse.
Cover image via Follow us on Instagram, TikTok, and WhatsApp for the latest stories and breaking news.
Italian supercar giant Ferrari SpA, known for its iconic 'Prancing Horse' emblem, has lost a trademark lawsuit against a Malaysian energy drink company
The local company's logo features a pair of rearing horses.
The High Court dismissed Ferrari's legal action against Sunrise-Mark Sdn Bhd, ruling that the latter's 'Wee Power' logo was not confusingly similar to Ferrari's globally recognised trademark.
This decision allows the 'Wee Power' logo to proceed with trademark registration.
Judge Adlin Abdul Majid stated unequivocally that Ferrari's claims of potential consumer confusion did not hold
Ferrari had initiated legal proceedings via an originating summons against Sunrise-Mark, seeking to overturn a decision made by the Registrar of Trademarks. This decision, issued in 2024, had dismissed Ferrari's opposition and subsequently allowed Sunrise-Mark's trademark application.
Ferrari also sought to downplay the term 'Wee Power', arguing that 'Power' had been disclaimed in the trademark registration, while 'Wee' was too generic to carry any distinctive character.
However, in its decision issued on 30 May, about one month ago, the High Court ruled against Ferrari, stating that the only similarity between the two trademarks was the depiction of horses, which was insufficient to cause consumer confusion.
The High Court highlighted key differences between the two brands
"The plaintiff's (Ferrari) mark is a device mark with one rearing horse while the defendant's (Sunrise-Mark) mark contains two rearing horses facing each other.
"The defendant's mark does not focus only on the rearing horses as it contains a large letter 'W' between the heads of the two horses and the words 'Wee Power' below the horses.
"I accept the defendant's explanation that the word 'Wee' is derived from the name of the defendant's founder, Wee Juan Chien, and does not refer to the ordinary definition of the word 'wee' in the English language.
"I find it unlikely that the defendant had intended for its energy drinks to be branded with words that mean 'very small power' or 'very early power'," Judge Adlin said.
The judge also pointed out that the court found no reasonable possibility that someone shopping for an energy drink would confuse it with Ferrari's supercars
"The plaintiff and the defendant are involved in different industries, with the plaintiff in the luxury automotive industry while the defendant traded in consumable goods.
"Both types of products do not compete with each other, and the plaintiff's customers and the defendant's customers are unlikely to overlap.
"I find it unlikely that the average consumer would see the defendant's mark and form the impression that it is similar to the plaintiff's mark," she added.
The court ordered Ferrari to pay costs.
Lawyers PC Kok and Ng Pau Chze appeared for Ferrari SpA, while YY Ho and Amirah Najihah Ameruddin represented Wee Power.
