Court rules Lotus have right to use name “Team Lotus”

2011 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Jarno Trulli, Lotus, Monaco, 2011

Lotus have won the right to continue using the name ‘Team Lotus’ in F1.

Justice Peter Smith dismissed Group Lotus’s claim to the Team Lotus name and roundel design.

He also ruled that Lotus’s use of the name ‘Team Lotus’ does not infringe Group Lotus’s trademarks in the name Lotus.

Their use of the name had been contested by Group Lotus, who make Lotus road cars and sponsor the Renault F1 team.

Last year Lotus used the name ‘Lotus Racing’ under license from Group Lotus, until it was withdrawn. Lotus bought the rights to the name ‘Team Lotus’ from David Hunt, who had acquired them when the original team collapsed at the end of 1994.

Lotus team principal Tony Fernandes wrote on Twitter: “We won. I’m over the moon. Team Lotus belongs to us. Our chassis name stays Lotus. No one can use the chassis name. We are the only Lotus. Team Lotus”

Group Lotus said they would appeal the decision. However they described the verdict as a “win on key issues” in a statement.

Sarah Price, head of legal at Group Lotus, said: “Group Lotus is pleased that its right to race under the Lotus name in F1 has been upheld and that the Defendants’ attempts to stop that have failed.

“The on-going dispute with Team Lotus and associated companies has been a cause for concern for all at Group Lotus. Despite the detailed judgment there are issues which still require clarification and we remain committed to obtaining this much needed clarity for the many fans of the Lotus marque – we are extremely grateful for their continued support. The decision to appeal has not been taken lightly.”

The statement noted: “The judge also found that Team Lotus has the right to continue to race in Formula 1 under the name Team Lotus but the effect of the judgement is that only Group Lotus can use the name "Lotus" on its own in F1.

“Group Lotus is concerned that this aspect of the judgement will cause confusion in the eyes of spectators and the wider public. Accordingly, Group Lotus is seeking leave to appeal so that the right to use the Lotus brand in Formula 1 is clarified once and for all in the interests of the sport and the fans. Group Lotus and its shareholder Proton Holding Bhd are confident of success on appeal.”

Update: Here is the verdict in full.

Lotus naming rights row

    Browse all articles on the Lotus naming rights row

    Image © Team Lotus

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    182 comments on “Court rules Lotus have right to use name “Team Lotus””

    1. “The decision to appeal has not been taken lightly.” …It must have required at least half a minute of deliberation.

      1. It is interesting that Group Lotus is calling Fernandez’s outfit “Team Lotus” in their statement instead of 1Malaysia Racing… I think someone is about to give up :-)

        1. Douglas62500
          27th May 2011, 17:19

          Yeah I would guess that’s probably the case, as Group Lotus “did their best to destroy” Team Lotus .

        2. WEll thats a clear sign as any that the main focus at Group has shifted to the Le Mans program, theyve essentially been given exclusive rights to sports cars.

          Whats gonna become of Bahar? He came in saying that hed remould Lotus Cars into a Porsche rival, and the first thing he has achienved in to ensure that Group will never enter F1 as a constructor or engine manufacturer. Does the ban also prohibit them from supplying engines in all single seaters?

        3. Also, I find Group stating that they had won the right to the black and gold livery misleading. From the verdict, it seems the judges verdict was essentially ” meh, its a colour scheme, I cant really rulkethat either side can have it over the other, and is therefore not even worth ruling on.”

          1. Yeah, bit of professional spinning the facts to show no defeat publicly. At the same time the simple fact they now refer to Team Lotus (instead of 1MY or whatever) is pretty significant, I think.

    2. From this point on Renault shall be known as Renault Renault Renault… just for good measure.

        1. Second to that!

      1. “Group Lotus is concerned that this aspect of the judgement will cause confusion in the eyes of spectators and the wider public”

        Well if they are that concerned why call themselves Lotus in the first place bearing in mind The other lotus team was there first…..

        1. And as most times sponsor names aren’t mentioned in team names unless official documents.

          1. Hmmmm, “Vodafone McLaren Mercedes” seems to come up quite often.

      2. Hahaha :-)

        Duran Duran
        Wet Wet Wet

      3. I never referred to them as anything else but Renault. Status quo to be honest.

      4. RacingForIndia
        28th May 2011, 10:01

        Lol good one.

    3. well then, lets hope we can put this one to bed.

      1. No chance of that for a while yet! Lawyers love to draw these things out to extract every penny they can.

      2. I’m confused, least to say.

        So GL can name a team Lotus, while Tony can retain the name Team Lotus?

        And what is that with TLC trademarks being revoked? Which trademarks exactly?

        Chaos continues…

    4. So, Fernandes has the right to use the Team Lotus name – but Group Lotus is the only team that can use “Lotus” in its name?

      Sounds like half a verdict to me, because there’s no mention of who was wrong and who was right in the use and misuse of the Lotus name in 2010. Or am I reading it wrong?

      “We are the only Lotus.”

      Oh, the hide.

      1. Agree. Although winners: lawyers who have been paid bucket loads when really everything will carry on the same. Losers: fans + F1 for having to put up with yet another confusing mess caused by warring egos.

        1. Something like that – I tend to think that judges will always try to leave things as undisturbed as possible in civil court; this isn’t really surprising therefore, although also not very helpful either. Lots of hot air and money wasted, as you say from ego’s inflating and posturing

        2. Was that really confusing to anyone? Things stay as they were. People don’t have problems telling the two teams apart.

          The whole thing was a bit silly, sure, but confusing? I don’t think so.

      2. there is a lot more to this story than the press mongers are letting on. I should have access to the judgement when it is available and i’ll be giving it a read through to establish whats gone on.

        The press releases stating that the use of ‘Lotus’ within F1 belongs to Group Lotus is the most troubling aspect of the judgement for me – as (obviously) Lotus is part of the name ‘Team Lotus’. I don’t see how the two aren’t misleading to each other – and therefore, infringing one or the others IP rights.

        Not until we have the judgement will we know the full details

        1. It seems to mean that Group Lotus have the rights to the name “Lotus” (on its own), while Fernandes has the rights to the name “Team Lotus”.

          1. ive interpreted it that [Group] Lotus can still use the name Lotus in F1 for things like Sponsorship (like on the Renault), which seems fair as they are the car company Lotus afterall. Whether this is a door to allow them to use ‘Lotus’ as a team name should be clarified with the judgement.

            I wonder if by awarding Fernades outfit the sole right to ‘Team Lotus’ and the badge, if the door is now shut on Group Lotus from ever being a constructor/team owner in F1 under the Lotus brand.

          2. Justice Peter Smith dismissed Group Lotus’s claim to the Team Lotus name and roundel design.

            So will Renault have to scrub the roundel logos from their cars and team kit?

            1. No, I think that it means that GL cant stop Team Lotus from using the design. Both can use it, one having “Team Lotus” on ofc, and the other just “Lotus”

            2. Apparently so, Brilliant!

      3. Team Lotus has already set up an eshop for merchandise so we can assume that they are allowed to keep the merchandising rights

        1. It’s not like that at all. The dispute over marketing began over the use of the Lotus name provided by Group Lotus in 2010. Now that the two are separate, that’s not an issue anymore. Fernandes has the marketing rights to the Team Lotus name because he’s had them ever since he purchased the name from David Hunt.

          1. I thought you’d be keeping a lower profile today.

            Six months of reheated Bahar talking-points that you’ve been incessantly carpet bombing into any available forum or comment thread, and now the judgement comes back exactly as everyone else expected.

            Fernandes has the marketing rights to the Team Lotus name because he’s had them ever since he purchased the name from David Hunt.

            If only you’d have believed us when we tried to tell you that last winter, you could have saved yourself an awful lot of wasted keystrokes.

            1. PM is not wasting keystrokes, as a teacher he believes he is educating us…. Poor Teachers always think they’re right.

      4. I’ve read my fair share of judgments in my career, and my interpretation is that Fernandes can call his team “Team Lotus”, but not “Lotus”, and Proton can call a car “Lotus” only and not any other name with the word “Lotus” in it.

        Still, I think the only people who really care about the issue anymore are Tony Fernandes and Dany Bahar…

        1. Proton can call a car “Lotus” only and not any other name with the word “Lotus” in it.

          For example Lotus Renault GP?

          1. Exactly.

            Or they could enter a team called “Lotus” next season and Fernandes could enter a team called “Team Lotus”…which is complete madness.

            1. But if they (GL) want to do that, and not lose all the Renault prize money, they would need all other teams to agree on that move. Very unlikely.

      5. The only thing that can happen is if both remain as they are. Nothing else can be done by either that wouldn’t cause the other to go to court.

      6. Seems to me the judge clearly states it would have been advisable to solve everything by mutual consent, and still forces them to sit down if they want the matters solved.

        Nice to see him saying this is not really something the courts can judge as its about racing, emotions, and heritage.

    5. …so Lotus Renault are still Lotus Renault and Team Lotus are still Team Lotus? Dammit..

      1. Hahahah. I thought the exact same thing. Basically.. nothing changed. What a waste of time and effort by Danny Bahar and Tony Fernandes. Though being successful CEOs would have given those two a little more grey matter

        1. maybe lotus software should become the title sponsor for HRT? then we would have 3!

    6. So I guess I was right after all…

      Nothing changes.

      1. . . . and the only ones who really win are the lawyers.

        1. Its not our fault, someone has to make cash out of this debacle! ;)

          1. If they are hardheaded enough to take this to court …

            Yeah, why not have them pay for their stubbornness.

    7. So they can still sponsor Renault and have Lotus written on the car, but what happens to the ACBC logo? Are they going to have to remove that from the Renault paraphanalia?

      1. according to what they have said on their website, they can rename Renault to Lotus if they wish, use the historic black and gold AND use the ACBC logo.

      2. No, Group Lotus still has the right to use the logo.

      3. No, Group Lotus are entitled to the ACBC roundel and to use the name “Lotus” on its on in motorsport.

      4. What’s ACBC?

        1. Anthony Colin Bruce Chapman

    8. Que?
      I’m more confused now than before. Can anyone please read the two excerpts below and explain? Thanks!

      ‘Team Lotus belongs to us. Our chassis name stays Lotus. No one can use the chassis name. We are the only Lotus.’

      ‘Team Lotus has the right to continue to race in Formula 1 under the name Team Lotus but the effect of the judgement is that only Group Lotus can use the name “Lotus” on its own in F1’

      1. It means that although Tony Fernandes owns the rights to the Team Lotus name, that does not guarantee he can use it. Under the law, owning a name and using it are two entirely different things.

        1. Doesn’t it mean something stupid like: Tony always had to add “Team” when he refers to his team. So he cannot speak of “Lotus”, he can only speak of “Team Lotus”.

          Whereas the people who are in business with Renault, can use “Lotus” whenever they want.

          Or am I wrong?

          1. As far as I can see, yes.
            The important bit is the “on its own”.
            Team Lotus (Fernandez) can carry on calling themselves ‘Team Lotus’, but Group Lotus are allowed to call themselves ‘Lotus’ on its own.

            1. And Baher can’t call his deal ‘the guys at team Lotus Renault GP’.. but can call it Lotus Renault GP (i.e. no ‘team’)

              TF can call his lot Team Lotus but not Lotus for short.

            2. But then how does that work with the chassis name? It’s just plain Lotus.

            3. That’s how I see it too, but it’s confusing. Scuderia Ferrari can call themselves Ferrari and/or Scuderia Ferrari, so Team Lotus should be able to call themselves Lotus and/or Team Lotus.

            4. Yeah, the ruling should’ve addressed that specifically. The fact that there are still so many unanswered questions really makes the judge seem a bit incompetent in the matter.

    9. This is madness!

      1. THIS – IS – SPARTA!

        What? Someone had to say it.

        1. You beat me to it. Epic

        2. I can almost imagine Chapman in Spartan armor kicking both Bahar and Fernandes into a bottomless pit.

      2. Madness? Yes it’s madness :P

    10. ankitpardeshi (@)
      27th May 2011, 14:43

      the outcome is meaningless

    11. So they’re still both Lotus? I think the judge just lost interest like most fans then.

      Fernandes: “We are the only Lotus. Team Lotus”

      Then a few lines later…

      “Group Lotus is pleased that its right to race under the Lotus name in F1 has been upheld and that the Defendants’ attempts to stop that have failed.

      Great clarity. They’re just bickering kids really, aren’t they?

      1. It’s becoming apparent that only half the issue has been resolved. There were two parts to this case: 1) settling the rightful owner of the Team Lotus name, and 2) deciding who was right in the breach of contract. It would appear that only the first issue has been resolved.

        Alternatively, both issues have been resolved, with the judge ruling in favour of Fernandes on the first and Group Lotus on the second. Group Lotus feel the obvious implication of this is that there should only be one team allowed to race under the Lotus name.

        1. No, the judge ruled on that matter of rightfull termination and being in breach of contract (calling it a minor thing). Fernandes was in breach with his clothing (apparently not even trying to adhere to the licence contract in this matter. On purpose?) and has to pay damages, for what its worth.

          But as Steph writes, the judge has told them mainly they should have sat down and agree on something to be sensible.
          Now its Team Lotus in F1 and Group Lotus having its Lotus brand of cars, both have a right to exist. And fight it out on track (nice one from the judge there)!

      2. Bigbadderboom
        27th May 2011, 15:00

        Well done Tony and Team Lotus. But I agree with Steph, lost interest now, it’s just boring.
        Reminds me of the Little Britain sketch with Vicky Pollard………….. Whatever!!!!!!

      3. There are really only two people that care… Bahar and Fernandes.

    12. So in other words Team Lotus can still call themselves “Team Lotus” but are in breach of the licencing agreement with Group Lotus and Fernandes has to pay damages.

      Meanwhile Group Lotus can field a team called “Lotus”, use the Lotus logo in the black and gold livery and is appealing to overturn Fernandes’ right to use “Team Lotus”.

      So we’re effectively back where we started, no one has won except the lawyers.

    13. I’m waiting for a Team Ferrari to emerge. With yellow cars and the horses in the logos turned the other way.

      1. Haha. Perhaps created by the estate of deceased glamour girl, Lola Ferrari?

        I bet the car would have massive side-pods :)

      2. Oh, they exist. They call themselves “Lamborghini” and have the horse angled down instead of up. Also, it’s not a horse, but a bull. Nevertheless, they are Italian and they make cars, which is enough for Ferrari.

        1. Well, by now I would argue on the being italian, as their engines are developed in Ingolstadt, the gearboxes probably in Wolfsburg, lot of the chassis mechanics in Germany as well and part of the electronics with a large portion of work in Mlada Boleslav, Czech Republic.
          And isn’t their head of design currently a Dutchman who previously worked at Audi (could be wrong there)?

          Nice one though PM about the logo etc. LOL

      3. Just out of curiosity, suppose a team came along and decided to call themselves Ferarri, would the Scuderia have a case?

        1. Presumably that wouldn’t be allowed, since the only Ferrari is the company that competes in motorsport and makes road cars. Lotus was always separated so the race team and road car company were different entities. Team Lotus is an attempt to carry on the racing team, Lotus Renault are the road car company sponsoring an F1 team.

          1. No, i think MPJ meant the team calling itself FERARRI – as in, spelled like that. I don’t think it would be allowed though :)

            1. Thats what I ment. A team calling itself FeraRRi..

              How about MacLaren.. :P

            2. On the other hand, i’ve seen some clothes brands calling themselves Adibas, Spuma or Mike :P dunno if they survived though

            3. andrewf1
              Exactly! Adidos, Nice, Reebak and the likes avoid copyright problems, so it’s safe to assume Ferarri would be ok as well.

          2. Mark Hitchcock
            27th May 2011, 16:00

            Also, even if for some reason a team were legally allowed to enter with a name very similar to Ferrari’s, I don’t think the FIA would allow them to race.
            And that’s the biggest thing for me about this whole ridiculous affair. Why didn’t the FIA step in when Lotus Renault submitted their entry?

            As the court verdict says:

            The major issue therefore is whether or not 2 sets of Lotus cars can legitimately race in F1 under a name incorporating Lotus in some way and use the Lotus Roundel. The organisers of F1 do not apparently regard it as a problem.

            Fair enough, Group Lotus didn’t want their trademarks being used in Team Lotus merchandise. But the whole thing about having two Lotus teams in F1 could easily have been sorted out by the FIA telling one of them to change the name.

            1. Since the constructor is still called Renault, the FIA apparently thought that it wouldn’t be a problem and that they could be sponsored by whoever they want to.
              The problem are the media who keep talking about a “Lotus Renault” team which is different from the “Lotus-Renault” listed in the on-screen graphics by FOM. That is where the real Problem starts. They should at least be consistent and say “Vodafone McLaren Mercedes” or “Mercedes Petronas” everytime they mention those teams

            2. @Xanathos – The “Lotus” part in “Lotus Renault” should be dropped, as it is with every other team.

            3. I agree. It’s strange that much of the F1 media keeps referring to them as Lotus Renault, when no one refers to Vodafone McLaren Mercedes or Petronas Mercedes but the teams themselves. Heck, no one even refers to John Booth’s team a Marussia Virgin Racing, and that’s actually part of their constructor’s name. Calling the Renault team Lotus just because they’re a sponsor is just silly.

          3. @Andrewf1, Damon – That’s contraffaction and an usage of trademarks that can be confused with the original ones, so they aren’t allowed.

            1. I didn’t know that. But it makes total sense.
              Thanks, fixy.

        2. Scuderia means stable in Italian.

          Don’t forget it is also Scuderia Torro Rosso.

      4. There’s also AF Corse in the Le Mans Series, where AF are the initials of team founder Amato Ferrari. :)

        Of course, they race Ferraris…

        1. LOL, would be fun if he wanted to enter as A Ferrari Corse, eh!

    14. So casual fans will still be confused with all this pathetic ****.

      FOTA or FOM or ANYONE except this stupid court must do something to prevent 2 different teams using the same name.


      1. Go Rough Riders!!!!!

        (You’d probably have to be Canadian to understand that)

        1. We now return you to exciting 15th round action at the Canadian Football League draft! So, the Saskatchewan Rough Riders, who scored only four rouges all last season….

          (For the uninitiated, the CFL has featured two teams called the Rough Riders – one from Ottawa and one from Saskatchewan, who played at the same time for decades. The Ottawa team is older, but is currently defunct.)

          1. Worse yet, there was an attempt to resurrect the Ottawa team, but someone had bought the rights to the name and expected payments, and the team ended up being called the Renegades instead. They went bust, and now the naming issue has been sorted out in Ottawa, but the new owners of the team from 2013 onwards need the permission of the Saskatchewan team to use the name.

            The CFL has been there and done that.

            (Sorry about the double post)

          2. You mean that wasn’t just a South Park joke?!?

            1. No it’s for real. There are only 8 teams in the league and 2 of them share a name. But it’s ok because we’re canadian eh? Actually it’s a great parallel for this ridiculousness.

            2. Snow Donkey?

              I love it!!!

              Actually there’s a difference.
              Saskatchewan is the Roughriders while Ottawa are the Rough Riders.

              We can tell them apart because one team is green while the other is black. Hey wait,
              Maybe that’s what we could use to differentiate between the two Loti?

      2. But the fact is Lotus (Cars) is not in F1, it’s just a sponsor of Renault and should remain such. It’s in the official entry list, but I see nowhere such a constant use of the sponsor in the team name.

    15. I would imagine that Group Lotus aren’t too happy about Team Lotus keeping the chassis name. It effectively bars them from creating their own race team in the future rather than just being a principal sponsor of Renault.

      1. Actually if what GL said is true, (the “only GL is entitled to use ‘Lotus’ on its own in F1” part)then the chassis name is very much at stake. And they CAN rename Renault to “Lotus”.

      2. Could anything stop them naming their chassis “Lotus F1” or “Group Lotus” and calling the team Lotus though? As far as I can tell, Fernandes has the right to the chassis name “Lotus” and team name “Team Lotus”, so I’m sure GL could find their way around that easily enough.

        1. I think the FOM has a rule that any team that has “F1” in its name must also have the word “team” somewhere in it. That’s why so many teams have “GP” where it used to say “F1”

          If Group Lotus did that, they’d have to be “Team Lotus F1” or “Team Group Lotus F1” or something like that, which is too close to “Team Lotus” and would be struck down immediately.

          1. Or Lotus F1 Team.

          2. Is it a recent rule? I recall Super Aguri (Super Aguri F1) and Midland (Midland F1 Racing) doing without “team” in their full names.

            1. The Last Pope
              28th May 2011, 3:00

              And Renault F1 from last year. I’m pretty sure there is no rule of this kind. I think there is a rule though that the car chassis names can’t have generic words like F1,GP,Team,Group,racing. So with Team Lotus having the rights to the Lotus named chassis, and Group Lotus only being able to use the word Lotus on its own, Group Lotus’ cars can never be Lotus in the FIA enterance. They would have to name their cars after a sponsor or something, like John Player Team Lotus did in the 70’s with their John Player Specials

    16. Sound_Of_Madness
      27th May 2011, 15:07

      Yes Tony. You are Team Lotus.


      1. It mean a lot like for example….if you were born in Russia would u liketo be called French?

        1. Sound_Of_Madness
          27th May 2011, 15:15

          I would have no problem with it. A name means nothing. Eg I do not care a bit about the Macedonia/FYROM saga that goes on in Greece…

          1. Im sure the Macedonias do… What im saying is the “branding” i.e what the product is called makes the difference between a mclaren ad a ferrari.

            1. Sound_Of_Madness
              27th May 2011, 15:20

              Mainly for commercial reasons? Tbh, I would be more sympathetic towards TF if he didn’t whine about “I am the real Lotus and nobody else is because I bought earned the right to use the name first” and was a Team AirAsia than that. I do not know how it would work on the average consumer fan though.

        2. Sound_Of_Madness
          27th May 2011, 15:17

          Besides, what gives an enterpreneur like TF to use the Team Lotus name, while not to, similarly, Dany Bahar?

          1. Because a Judge says so. Now Lotus can, under Tony, become what they were…. a racing team.

            1. Sound_Of_Madness
              27th May 2011, 15:21

              Based on? That’s my point…

            2. Obviously Tony has the right to continue what he is doing. The Judge has confirmed this, wheter its good or bad, thats not the point. What it has been based on is facts (id like to presume,however being thru the legal system myself, i know how most things are grey). Its too late to cry over spilt milk.

              I mean what right does a fench manufacturer have on naming their team from a “group” that IS ESSENTIALLY Malaysian.

              Finally, *** is wrong with branding Renault , Renault. They won the champ 5 years ago, twice, They should be proud of that and continue living up the renault name. I don’t know the ins and outs of how F1 business runs but if ur winning ( in anything ) stick to it. Id be proud to be apart of either “Team Lotus” or Renault.

          2. Tony bought the rights to Team Lotus, an entity which was always separate from Group Lotus, and until the arrival of Bahar, was recegonised as separate from Group themselves. The contract between Group and Fernandes even explicitly stated not to make any refencence to Team Lotus since Group did not own the rights too.

            An unholy mess from the start then.

          3. Because Bahar did not agree on purchasing the old team remains from David Hunt and did not do so. Simple as that.

    17. It pretty much scuppers Group Lotus’s plan to eventually rename Renault properly into Lotus. I think. So everyone will still call Renault as Renault and nothing else. And everyone will still call Team Lotus as Lotus and nothing else. So nothing changes.

      1. Disagree. Entirely.

        1. I am wrong, actually. Team Lotus must be called Team Lotus, not Lotus. Renault will still be Renault.

      2. Its like your saying if Coke was branded Pepsi it woulds stilll sell as much.

    18. As it should be, who were renault trying to kid…

      1. Very basic way of putting it but its the principle that counts here.

    19. Court rules Lotus have right to use name “Team Lotus”

      I didn’t know which Lotus was the one referred to in the title, but then I remembered you use Lotus for Team Lotus and Renault for Lotus Renault. Happy with the decision.

    20. There is nothing confusing about two companies having separate intellectual property and the rights to use it as they wish.

      The key thing to take from this case is that Team Lotus is recognised by law as being a distinct operation from Group Lotus and always has been.

      Team Lotus can use the Team Lotus IP.
      Group Lotus can use the Group Lotus IP.

      The result was a foregone conclusion back when the case was brought to light, in short Group Lotus tried to take IP that was owned by Team Lotus and thankfully failed.

      Regarding F1, Group Lotus can enter as Lotus and Team Lotus can enter as Team Lotus. Who is accepted though is as always a matter for the FIA.

      1. Further to this it appears Group Lotus cannot use the name ‘Lotus’ in F1 (or any other single seaters) hence the appeal.

        [GLCC may not] own or run or be associated with another motor racing team running ‘A’ Class Racing vehicles which may have in its title and use the name “Lotus”.

        ‘A’ Class means any single seater car.

        It would seem that Group Lotus’ bully-boy tactics have backfired and they are now worse off than before.

        1. It looks like that came from the 1985 Agreement, which has now expired.

          1. I think you’re correct Journeyer, disregard the above.

            The complexity is in having the judgement take into account the understanding between the parties in the agreement, and that neither has actually seeked to terminate the agreement since it was created. Even with the understanding that after termination of the agreement, certain clauses have remained inplace and unchallenged.

            Given the ownership changes and apparent disregard for the continued authority of the agreement the judgement appears to be well considered and fitting of the circumstances.

            1. Journeyer is right. The judge cleared that question.
              Both Group Lotus and Team Lotus can do their separate business activities (Manufacturing and selling sports cars, and manufacturing and racing cars respectively) under their own banner.

    21. Keith, I think you’re actually now going wrong by referring to Team Lotus as merely Lotus. You can’t do that. Well you can, but it’s technically wrong.

      “In a statement issued by the car company it said: “Team Lotus has the right to continue to race in Formula 1 under the name Team Lotus but the effect of the Judgment is that only Group Lotus can use the name “Lotus” on its own in F1.”

      Team Lotus must be called Team Lotus. Not Lotus. Not Lotus Racing. Not Chapman’s Underwear. But Team Lotus. Calling Team Lotus as Lotus, is wrong. Renault are still Renault.

      1. Well bring someone new into it then… Scrap the whole lLotus thing and bring some originality…. Caterham F1 sounds fantastic.

        1. Sound_Of_Madness
          27th May 2011, 15:24

          And we finally agree. :)

          1. Done deal. :P

      2. Not sure why you feel the need to cite a link for a quote which is already in the article.

        For obvious reasons I’m not going to only listen to Group Lotus’s point of view before making my mind up. I’ve only just received a copy of the full verdict and it’s quite a read!

        1. I read both, but I only remembered it from the Autosport one just now. So I played it safe…

          Fair point, but then nobody seems to have qualms about lapping up whatever Fernandes says.

        2. I read it yesterday evening. The judge has quite a few nice quotes in there.

          Interesting read.

      3. The media can use a shorter name, if it fits better into the headline or makes for easier/faster commenting.

        This is not about legal questions.

      4. Good on them. I hope they did improve the quality of the merchandise from what they showed to GL representatives at that meeting ;-)

        1. that should have gone below Keith linking to the Twitter message about the merchandise.

    22. There was I thinking this whole thing was over! But its still not if they are going to appeal.

      How can they feel strongly about it being reversed if they have just lost?

      Give up Group Lotus, everyone calls you Renault!

    23. I think I am going to start referring to one of those teams as “Team Lotus” and the other one as “The Lotus Team”… that oughtta clear it up.

      The messed up thing is that I dont really see how this could possibly be resolved unless you make one of those teams stop using the word “Lotus” altogether. Doesn’t seem like Lotus cars would be too interested in sponsoring a team if they cant use their name, and Team Lotus rightfully owns the deed to the “Team Lotus” name. This verdict just perpetuates the insanity of having two teams named basically the same thing.

      Wait – I’ve got it. We need to combine the teams. And genetically combine the four race drivers into two: One driver will be named Heikki Kovapetrov. The other – Jarnick Trufeld.

      1. Do you speak of teams like “Vodaphone Mclaren”, Marlboro Ferrari, “Petronas Mercedes” or “Telmex Sauber”?

        I don’t.

        So the greens are Lotus, the blacks Renault.


    24. ‘Caterham Team Lotus’ is implied in the TL press release as a possible marque. Is this much different from the century-long cohabitation of Daimler-Mercedes and Jaguar Daimler (for limos and the Dart) which people sort of got used to?

    25. Added a link to the full verdict to the article. I notice Lotus are already selling Team Lotus merchandise:

      1. Word up. So they should. and profit of course. What we can learn from this is that Renault being french shouls remain as Renault, and Lotus shall remain Malay.

        1. “Remain Malay”? When have Lotus ever been Malay?

          By that logic Renault are Luxembourgian.

          1. Actually, the Renault F1 team currently races under the British flag while Team Lotus races under the Malaysian flag.

            1. I know that, I was talking about the historical Lotus. That’s part of the reason I can’t support Fernandes; his ridiculous charade of racing a team called Team Lotus under a Malaysian flag. The real TL had union jacks all over their cars, for heaven’s sake.

    26. Surely ‘Group’ Lotus infers more than one, so technically, GL should really call themselves Loti :)

    27. Since people here think I am evil either way, I might as well have my smug satisfaction: I told you so. No, seriously, this is 100 % the outcome I have always predicted.

      That case has always been very obvious if you have some basic knowledge in copyright law. This appeal won’t do jack and is only a move for not having to accept defeat yet.

    28. To sum it up: both teams were fighting for different things.

    29. Way off topic, but as Lotus is now asian, id love to see one of the Japaenese manufacturers have another go at entertaining me.


      Reading anything about this case is extremely confusing…

    31. Haven’t slogged through the whole opinion yet, but seems uncommonly readable, a good summary of parts of F1 history, and has some good zingers. For example:

      Addressing Chapman’s view that Lotus cars should become more mainstream, every-day road cars:
      “The reference to women car drivers might not be quite so apposite in 2011 and is difficult to square with the Lotus Elan and Diana Rigg.” Major burn, your honor.

      In the end, this was just a ******* match between two big egos with money to spare. Sometimes, these commercial cases are simply a duels—in modern days, we use attorneys rather than “seconds.” Two business people operating in the same sphere want to score a win and to show their backers/investors that they are ready to use brass knuckles against a competitor, however pound-foolish a litigation may be versus settlement.

      Then again in this case, maybe an actual duel would have been better. In which case, if I were Fernandez, I would have selected Sutil as my second (too soon?).

    32. far too many lotus’…i’m way confused, good job I don’t really give a dam

      the green ones are pretty cool…why do the black ones not wanna be called renault any more? after all…the lotus brand is tainted with them dodgy proton people whilst the renault name just has to contend with being ”french n’ cheerful” (an evil yes, but far less of an evil surely)

    33. Hopefully this ruling will make both parties realise the best solution is a settlement where the team lotus name and a sizeable amount of money changes hands, leading to one lotus team and one caterham team. This will clear the confusion for the fans and allow both sides able to exit this mess with their heads held high.

    34. team lotus statement 2

      Team Lotus and Group Lotus plc – Clarification:

      Team Lotus is very pleased with the judgment in the dispute with Group Lotus and does not intend to appeal any of the key findings. As Group Lotus has already announced its intention to appeal the Judge’s decision on the headline argument in this case it is clear they do not feel they have won. There are a number of points that are interesting to note in the Judge’s findings which invalidate any claim of victory by Group Lotus in the main cause of this action:

      – The Judge ruled that Team Lotus owns the separate goodwill in the “Team Lotus” name and roundel and we cannot be prevented by Group Lotus from using either of them in relation to Formula 1 racing. This was their headline argument in this case and the primary objective of Group Lotus was to stop us racing under the Team Lotus name. On this point they have lost.

      – Until 1985 Group Lotus and Team Lotus had their own separate pools of goodwill in respect of the two separate businesses – the road car operation as one entity and the Formula 1 team as another. The claim by Group Lotus to have always owned the goodwill in Team Lotus failed.

      – Having clearly established that there were two separate pools of goodwill the judgement also establishes that the goodwill in the Team Lotus name and roundel has continued and still survives – it has not been eliminated by non-use. The claim by Group Lotus on that point has failed.

      – It has also been established that there is no confusing similarity between Team Lotus and Lotus. As there is independent goodwill in the mark Team Lotus it is not confusingly similar to Lotus. Group Lotus cannot stop Team Lotus racing under the name we own, so again, Group Lotus has failed in their main cause of action.

      – Although goodwill in the “Team Lotus” name and mark subsists, our trade marks for the Team Lotus name and roundel have been revoked for non use between 2003 and 2008. This however has no impact upon our ability to continue to use the “Team Lotus” trade marks, and indeed to re-register them.

      – The only point that Group Lotus won on, and could therefore claim any sort of victory, was the point that the Judge himself referred to in paragraph three of his judgment as “less important”. The Judge found in their favour that Team Lotus had breached the licence agreement by producing merchandising without pre-approval and that Group Lotus was therefore entitled to terminate. This has no bearing whatsoever on the key question as to whether Team Lotus is allowed to continue to race under the Team Lotus name.

    35. In my pictures’ folders, I still have separate ones:
      Lotus Racing (2010-)
      Team Lotus (1958-1994)
      Renault F1 (1977-)

      1. Where is Benetton in that? ;)

        1. don’t forget Pacific Team Lotus (1995)

    36. My ideal judgement would have been that no could use the Lotus name in any form again in F1 but that was never going to happen.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if their any some deals going on behind the scenes now so only one of them are called Lotus and it may result in Group Lotus paying Fernandes a large amount to buy the name and Fernandes using the Caterham name.

    37. I think my understanding of this judgment conflicts with the first line of this article: “Lotus have won the right to continue using the name ‘Team Lotus’ in F1.”

      My understanding is that they should no longer be referred to as Lotus, but Team Lotus. They have won in the sense that they can call themselves “Team Lotus”, but legally, when referring to Lotus, we are talking about “Group Lotus”.

      What a mess.

      1. No, that is not entirely the point. They are Team Lotus, but it is common and not deemed confusing if Media refer to them like that for reason of “economy”, i.e. faster commmenting or fitting it into the headline.

        And Group Lotus stays GL/Group Lotus, to avoid conflicting with its subsidiary, Lotus Cars. The Renault team is not Lotus but Renault with a Lotus sponsorship (bringing only the Lotus badge and Money, no further involvement).

    38. Shouldn’t the plural of Lotus be Loti ?

      1. Clive Jones always referred to the plural of Lotus as Lotii. :)

        1. The Renault should be called Lotii, part Lotus part Genii!!!

    39. The judge also found that Team Lotus has the right to continue to race in Formula 1 under the name Team Lotus but the effect of the judgement is that only Group Lotus can use the name “Lotus” on its own in F1.

      Group Lotus is concerned that this aspect of the judgement will cause confusion in the eyes of spectators and the wider public.


      1. I read through the whole of it. Seems the judge thinks the same about that, its nice to see how he makes clear it would have been better to sit down and agree on something.

        And as for who is the “real” Lotus, he states that in effect these teams will have to go on track and show what they have got.

    40. Lotus the Bug wants to get in on this action…

    41. I honestly think this is about as fair a judgement as you could get. Unfortunately for Group Lotus the ‘key issues’ they won weren’t really the ‘key issues’ for Team Lotus.

    42. Not a bad judgement – his honour even said he regretted that the two opponents couldn’t sort it out on the racetrack rather than in a law court.

      So now we have British Racing Green Lotuses (I owned a BRG Elan) and JPS coloured Renaults (I owned to JPS Europas and still smoke – natural sun-cured tobacco that I hand roll in rice paper), so, like the judge, look forward to them getting the final public opinion on the race track. I just hope the commentators can keep it simple: Lotus or Renault (and Renault should be proud of their heritage in motor racing in general and F1 in particular.)

      I find it ironic that we have four drivers – a Finn, a German, an Italian and a Russian – plus two Malaysian “owners” all fighting over CABC British heritage. The drivers are all too young to have even met Colin and I don’t see any suggestions that the “owners” claim any personal knowledge. I knew him pretty well and would suggest – with his near paranoia for keeping his activities totally compartmentalized in case the racing went belly up – that he must be grinning in his grave.

      Let’s look back at the track record in a few years – may the “best man” win …

      1. Forgot to add my thanks to David Hunt who kept the “Team Lotus” name alive exactly as Chapman would have wished. Never met him, but knew his brother (James) who once in the paddock (touring cars at Charade in the late 1960s) called my girlfriend’s Yorkshire terrier “un rat éléctrique à piles” – a battery powered rat – after he tripped over the animal and fell into a puddle. The F1 world probably owes David much gratitude.

        1. Indeed so. Unfortunately, it seems he could be the biggest loser in this case. His license was terminated due to lack of use, and it was awarded to Team Lotus as part of a separate application. Team Lotus probably already made some form of payment to him, but this means TL are no longer obligated to pay him any further.

          “un rat éléctrique à piles” – sounds like James Hunt, all right. :D

    43. I’m hardly a casual F1 fan, but I will admit the 5 Live commentary on the Monaco practice sessions were quite confusing in regards to Lotus. P1 had Bruno Senna calling his team Lotus, P2 had Karun Chandok calling his team Lotus, God help the casual fan in those circumstances!

    44. So where was Bernie when teams were applying for places? Was he not aware that 2 Lotus brands could have confused fans?
      It was easy enough to identify which Schumacher was which as they were usually some distance apart on the track, but 2 similar-sounding teams is plain daft.
      Could next year see a MACLaren team along with Mclaren?

    45. Lotus Renault GP = Renault
      Team Lotus-Renault = Lotus-Renault

      Always has, always will… This basically just confirms that. There was no way that Bahr would have won. Fernandes bought the rights to the name ‘Team Lotus’ from the beginning. The FIA calls them Lotus, which is their problem, not Team Lotus’.

    46. lutus vs lutus :?

    47. So Green Lotus will now be call “Team Lotus” with Black Lotus “Renault”?

    48. GET IN!! (he says after being AFK for 10 hours)

      I wish Team Lotus the best of luck in their efforts to succeed in F1 as a new team, and hope that Group Lotus acheive whatever it is they’re looking for in F1 as a sponsor.

      It feels good to (c), ™ and (patent pend.) all that stuff. Pending appeal of course.

      Can’t wait to go ballistic when a new team with a new factory and new (British) talent get their first point.

    49. if they both stopped fighting and used the legal costs to Develop the cars we would see some real racing instead of this panzi legal battles!!

    50. As I understand it Renault no longer owns an F1 Team as is being suggested on here as it sold out to Genii Capital so they own the former Renault team and Renault are only an engine supplier now as is Cosworth. Group Lotus is just a sponsor of that team so are only named on the car because of that. If you take that as the name of the team they should be called Genii – Renault, and Team Lotus as Team Lotus – Renault, as per the FIA rules.
      In the case of Formula racing cars, an automobile make is a complete car. When the car manufacturer fits
      an engine which it does not manufacture, the car shall be considered a hybrid and the name of the engine
      manufacturer shall be associated with that of the car manufacturer. The name of the car manufacturer
      must always precede that of the engine manufacturer. Should a hybrid car win a Championship Title, Cup
      or Trophy, this will be awarded to the manufacturer of the car.
      Make of that what you will?.

    Comments are closed.