Premier Inn can ‘Rest Easy’ in UK trademark dispute with easyGroup

Premier Inn has successfully defended a trademark infringement case brought by easyGroup concerning the use of the phrase ‘rest easy’. The decision highlights the limits of trademark protection where commonly used language is involved and reinforces the importance of context and consumer perception in brand disputes, as Mona Asgari explains.  

The easyGroup, owner of the well-known ‘easy’ family of brands, such as easyJet and easyHotel, has been unsuccessful in its attempt to challenge the use of the phrase ‘rest easy’ by Premier Inn, the UK’s largest hotel brand. 

The easyGroup claimed ‘rest easy’ infringed several of its registered trademarks, including easyHotel and Rest Easy Apartments, but Premier Inn refuted this claim, arguing that its use of the phrase was descriptive and that consumers would not associate it with easyGroup’s portfolio of ‘easy’-branded businesses. 

In August 2025, the High Court agreed with Premier Inn, concluding that there was no likelihood of confusion between Premier Inn’s marketing slogan and the easyGroup’s registered trademarks.   

‘Rest Easy’ trademark infringement case: The Court’s findings  

In its ruling, the High Court judge found that the “average consumer” would not “make a link” between the signs used by Premier Inn and the easyGroup marks. 

While the court acknowledged that easyGroup has successfully asserted its rights in a recognised “family” of easy-formative marks in previous cases – such as easyGroup Ltd v Easyfundraising Ltd – it noted that the company had not relied on that doctrine in this instance. The absence of that argument, coupled with the descriptive nature of ‘rest easy’, proved significant. 

Reaction and next steps 

Following the ruling, easyGroup issued a statement criticising the decision, claiming that the judgment contained “clear errors of law” and that certain findings were “ridiculous”. The company has since indicated its intention to appeal.   

Key takeaways for brand owners 

The ruling provides a valuable reminder to brand owners of the following key points: 

• Common language has limits: Trademark protection will not necessarily extend to ordinary or descriptive phrases, even where a brand has a strong reputation.
• Context matters: The likelihood of confusion depends on how the mark is used and perceived by the average consumer, rather than the owner’s broader brand family.
• Strategic reliance on a ‘family’ of marks: Where businesses operate multiple ‘sub-brands’, explicitly invoking the family of marks concept can strengthen a claim – but only if properly pleaded and supported by evidence. 

This decision also serves as a useful reminder that even well-known brand owners must balance enforcement with realism about the scope of their exclusive rights. 

To find out more about the ‘Rest Easy’ case or for dedicated advice on protecting and enforcing your trademark rights, speak to your Novagraaf attorney or contact us below. 

Mona Asgari is a UK Chartered Trademark Attorney based at Novagraaf in London.