The UK Supreme Court, in an interesting judgment issued a few weeks ago, examined the intrigued area of director accessory liability.

The case of Lifestyle Equities C.V. and another (Appellants) v Ahmed and another (Respondents) concerned a trademark infringement by a company.

The main question for the Supreme Court was whether the directors’ liability was strict – in line with the strict liability imposed on the Companies under trademark legislation – or whether it was necessary to show that the directors had the requisite knowledge of the trademark infringement to be found liable.

The Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that personal liability for directors requires clear evidence of their involvement and knowledge of the wrongful acts (in this case of the trademark infringement).