Region: Singapore

IPOS introduces mediation scheme for IP disputes

To encourage parties in Intellectual Property of Singapore (IPOS) proceedings to choose mediation as an avenue for dispute resolution, IPOS has launched a mediation promotion scheme to fund the administration and mediator fees incurred by parties during mediation up to a combined total of S$5,500 per mediation case.

12 April 2016

Higher burden of proof for invalidation proceedings?

A recent Court of Appeal decision brings to light the issue of whether a higher burden of proof is required to establish a likelihood of confusion in a claim to invalidate an existing trademark, in comparison to opposing a trademark for which registration is sought.

26 January 2016

Own name defence: a global perspective

In many countries people or even companies have a defence to trademark infringement when using their own names. In this article Baker & McKenzie’s global IP team outlines where an own name defence exists and whether this extends to company names

01 January 2016

Challenger narrowly loses its application for interim injunction: lessons for brand owners

In <I>Challenger Technologies Limited v Courts (Singapore) Pte Ltd</I>, the High Court has dismissed Challenger Technologies Limited's application for an interim injunction restraining Courts (Singapore) Pte Ltd from running an advertising campaign which allegedly infringed Challenger's marks. The decision highlights the difficulties brand owners face in obtaining an interim injunction even where a <I>prima facie</I> case for infringement has been established.

29 October 2015

Formula One Licensing fails to prevent registration of F1H20 mark

In <I>Formula One Licensing BV v Idea Marketing SA</I>, the High Court has dismissed Formula One Licensing BV’s case on all grounds and allowed Idea Marketing SA’s application for the mark F1H20 to proceed to registration. Among other things, the court held that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that Formula One Licensing had acquired goodwill in the F1 mark prior to the date of application of the F1H20 mark.

27 October 2015

Court of Appeal upholds decision to invalidate MANCHESTER cigarette mark

In <I>Global Tobacco Manufacturers v Al Mahamid</I>, the Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against the order of the High Court to invalidate the figurative mark MANCHESTER for cigarettes based on a likelihood of confusion with the earlier figurative mark MANCHESTER, which also covered cigarettes. Among other things, the Court of Appeal held that actual confusion is not a necessary element of the cause of action.

14 October 2015

Owner of ANGRY BIRDS fails to prevent registration of ANGRY BITE for Class 30 goods

In <I>Rovio Entertainment Ltd v Kimanis Food Industries Sdn Bhd</I>, the High Court has upheld a decision of the registrar in which the latter had dismissed an opposition by Rovio, the owner of the ANGRY BIRDS mark, against the registration of the figurative mark ANGRY BITE in Class 30. One of the issues before the court was whether two earlier registered marks may be combined into a composite whole for the purposes of comparison with the opposed mark.

15 September 2015

Converse fails to prevent registration of star device mark for shoes

The Intellectual Property Office has dismissed Converse Inc’s opposition to the registration of the mark CLASSIC JAZZ STAR (and star device) in Class 25. Among other things, the office found that there was no likelihood of confusion between the mark applied for and Converse’s mark CONVERSE ALL STAR (and star device).

22 July 2015

High Court: no likelihood of confusion between HAN'S and HAN

In <I>Han’s (F&B) Pte Ltd v Gusttimo World Pte Ltd</I>, the High Court has dismissed an action for trademark infringement and passing off brought by the owner of a well-known café chain called Han’s against the owner of a high-end Japanese restaurant named HAN Cuisine of Naniwa. The court also dismissed the defendant’s counterclaims that the plaintiff’s marks were invalid and that the plaintiff had made groundless threats of infringement proceedings.

22 June 2015

Bali's KU DE TA beach club finally wins back its name

A consortium of Indonesian and foreign entrepreneurs that had established an iconic Bali beach club concept and ended up suing in the Singapore courts have won on appeal. Some of the partners had granted a spurious licence for the brand, leading to the establishment of a rival club of the same name in Singapore.

18 June 2015

Unlock unlimited access to all WTR content