A rival registered a company name like yours: the right UK challenge route

When a rival registers a company name that feels very close to yours, the hardest part is often not spotting the issue. It is working out which challenge route actually matches the problem, what evidence matters, and what result that route can realistically deliver.

In the UK, these disputes split into different tracks. A narrow Companies House complaint can apply where a registered name is "too like" an existing name on the register. A section 69 objection to the Company Names Tribunal is different and focuses on whether the registered name is the same as, or sufficiently similar to, a name associated with you in which you have goodwill or reputation. Trade mark infringement and passing off sit separately again.

That distinction matters for growing businesses because the wrong route can waste time while the other side keeps trading. This guide explains the scope, evidence, timing points and practical limits of each option, including the important point that a company-name order does not by itself resolve every wider branding issue.

Choose the route before making a demand

Before sending demands or filing forms, sort the dispute into the correct bucket. That matters because the tests, evidence and possible outcomes are different.

• Use the Companies House "too like" route if the concern is mainly that the registered company name is almost identical to an existing name on the register.
• Use a section 69 Company Names Tribunal objection if the other company has registered the same name as a name associated with you in which you have goodwill, or a sufficiently similar name likely to mislead people by suggesting a connection.
• Consider trade mark or passing off advice separately if the real problem is branding in the market, customer confusion, website use, packaging, advertising or online trading behaviour.

More than one issue can exist at once, but they are not the same complaint dressed up in different words. Choosing the wrong route can waste time and leave the real risk untouched.

What Companies House can and cannot decide

The Companies House complaint route for a name that is "too like" is deliberately narrow. It focuses on the registered company name itself and whether it differs from another registered name by only a few characters, signs, symbols or punctuation, or otherwise looks and sounds the same.

That route is not a general brand dispute forum. Companies House says it cannot consider alleged trade mark infringement, implied association, possible passing off, geographic location or similarity of activities when dealing with a "too like" complaint.

That means you should not rely on arguments such as "we are in the same sector" or "customers may think we are connected" to turn a weak register-based complaint into a stronger one. Those points may matter elsewhere, but not for this specific test.

There is also a timing point here that should not be assumed to apply to other routes. Companies House says the Secretary of State must order a company to change a "too like" name within 12 months of the company name being registered.

If the complaint succeeds, the practical remedy is a name change order. If the company does not comply, Companies House can determine a new name for it. That is useful, but it is still aimed at the registered company name rather than every way the business presents itself in the market.

When section 69 and the Company Names Tribunal are the better fit

Under Companies Act 2006 section 69, this route is different. It allows an applicant to object where the registered company name is the same as a name associated with the applicant in which the applicant has goodwill, or where it is sufficiently similar that its use would be likely to mislead members of the public by suggesting a connection between the company and the applicant.

Goodwill is central here. The legislation says goodwill includes reputation of any description, so the focus is not limited to a registered trade mark. A business can have the right kind of reputation even if its protection strategy has been informal.

Section 69 does not make proof of a bad motive a universal prerequisite. The Tribunal sits within the Intellectual Property Office and applications are made to a company names adjudicator.

The test is still not automatic. A similar name alone does not guarantee a successful objection. You must be able to show the relevant goodwill or reputation and explain why the registered name meets the section 69 ground.

The respondent may also have defences. Section 69 refers to points including earlier registration before the activities relied on, registration in the ordinary course of a company formation business with the company available for sale on standard terms, adoption in good faith, or lack of significant adverse effect on the applicant's interests. If none of the available defences is shown, the objection is upheld.

What evidence to gather before you file

If you are considering the Tribunal route, gather dated evidence of the goodwill or reputation you rely on and when the relevant trading activity began.

The timing matters: section 69 allows the respondent to argue that it registered its name before the activities on which you rely to show goodwill. If an applicant does not file evidence to support its case, the adjudicator may dismiss the application.

Useful material can include:

• dated invoices, quotes and purchase orders using the name
• website pages, brochures and social media profiles showing the name in trading use
• customer correspondence and testimonials identifying your business by that name
• marketing spend records or campaign materials
• evidence of press coverage, awards or industry recognition
• proof of when your business started trading under the name

For a Companies House "too like" complaint, the evidence task is narrower. Put the names side by side exactly as registered and identify the small differences, if any. The closer the complaint stays to the register comparison, the more disciplined and credible it is.

In either route, preserve screenshots, filing dates and copies of correspondence. Do not assume the other side will keep their online material live once challenged.

How the Tribunal application works in practice

The Tribunal says you can apply on Form CNA 1. You must provide your details, the details of the company name you object to, and a concise statement of grounds explaining why you are applying.

You also need a UK address for correspondence, and the application fee must be included with the form. The Tribunal publishes fees separately, so it is safer to check the current amount before filing rather than rely on old summaries.

The form also asks whether you contacted the company beforehand, when you did so and what you said. The Tribunal warns that not giving adequate notice of your intention to file may affect any award of costs at the end of the proceedings.

If the registration holder defends the case, the Tribunal will set timescales for each side to file evidence. If the registration holder does not defend within the time allowed, the adjudicator will normally order a change to a non-offending name. If the company then fails to change it by the specified date, the adjudicator may determine a new name and direct the Registrar to make the change.

Proceedings can end with a written decision, with or without a hearing. Documents filed are generally open to public inspection unless the adjudicator directs otherwise.

What a name challenge does not solve on its own

This is the part many businesses miss. Winning a company name challenge does not automatically resolve every branding problem.

A registered company name is one legal identifier. A business may also trade through domain names, packaging, social accounts, signage, product labels or unregistered trading styles. A name change order is valuable, but it primarily changes the registered company name. It does not by itself determine a separate trade mark infringement or passing off dispute, so wider brand-use issues may still need separate advice or action.

That is why company name registration and trade mark or passing off claims should be treated as separate questions. If customers are already being diverted, suppliers are confused, or the other side is using the sign in trading rather than only on the register, you may need a broader IP strategy alongside any company name challenge.

A practical first-action plan

• Compare the rival's registered name with the Companies House register and ask whether this is a pure "too like" issue.
• Map when you began the activities relied on for goodwill and what dated evidence of reputation you can produce.
• Save evidence of your use, their registration details and any live trading activity.
• Decide whether the real harm is the registered company name, the market-facing brand use, or both.
• Take advice before sending an aggressive cease and desist letter that does not match the correct legal route.

Key Takeaways

• Use the Companies House "too like" route only for narrow register-based complaints about names that are almost identical on the register.
• A section 69 Tribunal objection tests the registered name against your goodwill or reputation: the same-name ground and the sufficiently-similar, misleading-connection ground are distinct.
• The respondent may still succeed with statutory defences, including earlier registration, good faith or no significant adverse effect.
• Timing and evidence matter: dated proof of trading use, goodwill and registration details can shape whether a challenge gets traction.
• A successful name-change order is useful, but it does not by itself decide separate trade mark, passing off or wider trading-use disputes.

For non-contentious UK brand and company-name planning, Sprintlaw's IP consultation can help you review the commercial documents and options for protecting your name. If you need to file or defend a Tribunal application or pursue legal proceedings, seek a suitably regulated disputes adviser. Call 08081347754 or email team@sprintlaw.co.uk.