The UK is not the US. In the US patent trolling can be a full time career, Britain has a legal system that does things other than line the richest pockets.
Your tribalism is blinding you.
If the trademark holder's case is "I own the trademark to `Bitcoin` in it's entirety" then you might have a point, but it's unlikely that such a vague definition would be accepted as a trademark to begin with. Common knowledge of Bitcoin's existence was in place in 2016 when the trademark was granted, as well as in any court cases in 2018 or thereafter. This is without even broaching the issue of the integrity of the British legal system (which has been variously very corrupt in instances where the interests of the *ahem* richest pockets was in question)