This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. |
Solite Impex Pte Ltd v Ang Lay See trading as Beng Poh Heng Trading and Others
[1997] SGHC 135
Suit 2063/1995
Lai Kew Chai J
26 May 1997
1
Judgment:
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 7 There are accordingly two questions for my determination:-
9
10
11 The relevant law of registered design
12 Interlego
AG v Tyco Industries Inc
13
14 "
15 10 Section 11(2) of the UK 1949 Act, as amended, provides:-
16
17
18 "1. Designs registrable under Act
19
20 (a) a method or principle of construction, or
21
22
23
24
25
26 (4) A design shall not be regarded as new for the
purposes of this Act if it is the same design -
27 (a) registered in respect of the same or any other
article in pursuance of a prior application, or
28 (b) published in the United Kingdom in respect of the
same or any other article before the date of the application,
29 or if it differs from such a design only in immaterial
details or in features which are variants commonly used in the trade.
30 .....
31
32 Leatheries Ltd v
Lycett Saddle and Motor Accessories Co Ltd (1909) 26 RPC 166 and Kangol
(Manufacturing) Ltd v Centro Komise (London) Ltd
33
34
35
36 16 The defendants rely on the Malaysian case of Teh Teik Boay v
Chuah Siak Loo [1962] 28 MLJ 80
37 17 Counsel for the plaintiffs rely on Mem Company Inc v Cussons
(International) Ltd [1974] RPC 7
38
39
40
41
42 Sgd:
43 LAI KEW CHAI J
44 Judge
Toh Kok Seng and Mark Lim [Lee & Lee] for the plaintiffs
Alex Thian Phin Hock and Lee Kuan Choon [Yeo Wu & Thian] for the defendants