Philip Lawrence's Killer is Still Mad

Some mad fool will kill him. His desire to stay in this country is infantile and very stupid.

Does he not realise (however reformed he may be) that there are unreformed people out there who will seek revenge?

Harrods and the Harrodian School

This is an old case, just made available on the internet, but perhaps typifies the litigious nature of Harrods under current management:

How many other stores can sell you an elephant? Buy your stocks and shares? Arrange a safari in Africa? Engage a Black Watch piper for Hogmanay? Insure your life? Paint your portrait? Find you a house? Clean your silver? Give messages to your friends? Find a school for your child? Decorate your home? Send you on honeymoon?

"Find a school for your child" not run a school to educate your child.

Thus Harrods sued the Harrodian school for trading on its reputation and causing it loss which would sound in damages (and probably close the school).

Harrods lost at first instance, but they appealed. Ridiculous is one of the adjectives that springs to mind.

Yet the really surprising thing is that they only lost the appeal on a 2-1 majority.

Lord Justice Millet got it right. Pay careful attention to the the laconic final sentence of the following paragraph from his judgment:

Over the years Harrods has offered a vast range of services. These include a bank (established in 1890) which carries on business under the name "The Harrods Bank", a travel agency, shoe repairs, jewellery repairs, the supply of school uniforms for more than 90 fee-paying schools, a golf school, livery stables, piano tuning, a wedding service, funeral undertakers, auctioneers estate agents and surveyors, a lending library,a post office, a theatre agency, a travel bureau, an insurance agency, house removals, dry cleaning, and opticians. In the days of the empire it fitted out children of parents living overseas for school in England, and could even be used to find a suitable school for a child; but these services have long been discontinued. It has from time to time introduced new products and services and discontinued others. It no longer supplies elephants.

And it does not and never has educated children. Some may be glad of that.

Unaccountably, to my mind, Sir Michael Kerr dissented. I can only refer you to his judgment in its totality but I cite the following:

The use of the adjectival form of their own name will become lost to the plaintiffs; but the false impression of a connection between the plaintiffs and unconnected businesses using the name "Harrodian" will proliferate. The plaintiffs' reputation will become involved with their fortunes or misfortunes, and become a hostage to them. In my view the plaintiffs have done nothing to deserve this detriment, nor the defendants this benefit.

It is not fair to judge this passage with the benefit of hindsight but it was absurd at the time and it remains absurd today.

The Harrodian School still exists (visit their site) and I cannot think that anyone associates it with the rather silly department store that shares part of its name.

I have not confirmed this with them but I do not believe that the Harrodian school has ever sold elephants or has any intention in the future of selling elephants. Elephants will not ever be available on this blog or my main site.

I will never ever compete with Harrods in any way or form. I promise you this, Mr Al Fayed. Please do not sue me.