Case preview: design rights at play in baby baths battle

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Case preview: design rights at play in baby baths battle

Royal Court of Justice

After the Trunki v Kiddee design case made its way up to the UK Supreme Court, another dispute, Shnuggle v Munchkin, is brewing

This oddly named dispute might sound like something out of a fairy tale but the case, due to be heard before the England and Wales Intellectual Property Enterprise Court this month, could make for an interesting design dispute.

The claim, filed by baby product maker Shnuggle, alleges infringement of two registered Community designs (RCDs) – 002224196-0001 and 002616763-0001 – as well as various UK unregistered designs, directed to its ‘Shnuggle Baby Bath’. 

Shnuggle is seeking an injunction to restrain the defendant, US-based Munchkin, and a UK counterpart called Lindam, from infringing its design rights. It also wants an order for delivery up or destruction of all infringing articles, and their recall and removal from commerce.

Munchkin, the claim alleges, threatens and intends to import into and sell in the UK and the EU a baby bath called the ‘Sit & Soak’ (S&S). 

The S&S product is available to buy on Amazon and retailer Argos and open to UK customers.

The Shnuggle, according to the claim, is currently the “Amazon number one best seller for baby baths and tubs” and is sold at various retailers throughout the UK.

According to the claim: “The shape of the S&S is the same or substantially the same as the shape of each of the Shnuggle designs which are relied upon. The similarities are so great that it is highly unlikely that they arose by chance, and very likely that they arose by copying.” 

It adds: “There is considerable design freedom available to a designer of a baby bath. Subject to the requirement that the bath must be of a size suitable for bathing a baby and should be capable of retaining water, a baby bath can be made in many different shapes.”

The defendant claims that the RCDs should be declared invalid.  

They add that the informed user is not merely an adult member of the public, as Shnuggle claims, but is a parent with a child of 0 to 12 months who is well-researched and particularly aware of the differences between various competing childcare products.

It remains to be seen whether this will attract the same attention as Trunki, in which the Supreme Court found that the Kiddee case did not infringe the design rights held in the Trunki ride-on suitcase

The case will begin on September 23. Gowling WLG is acting for Shnuggle and has instructed Michael Hicks of Hogarth Chambers. Munchkin is being represented by D Young & Co, which has instructed Lindsay Lane QC of 8 New Square. 



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The UK-India trade deal doesn’t mention legal services, showing India has again failed to agree on a move that could help foreign firms and local practitioners
Eva-Maria Strobel reveals some of the firm’s IP achievements and its approach to client relationships
Lateral hires at Thompson Hine and Pierson Ferdinand said they were inspired by fresh business opportunities and innovative strategies at their new firms
The launch of a new IP insurance product and INTA hiring a former USPTO commissioner were also among the top talking points this week
The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
Gift this article