Search results

Selected filters:

Singapore

Article type

Topic

Sector

467 results found for your search

Sort options
07 April 2011

Court of Appeal clarifies when mark is “earlier trademark”

In Campomar SL v Nike International Ltd, the Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal by Campomar SL against a decision of the High Court, and held that Campomar's NIKE mark was an “earlier trademark” within the meaning of Section 8(1) of the Singapore Trademarks Act, read together with Section 2(1).

26 October 2010

Pork noodles stall owner held to have engaged in passing off

In Tang Chay Seng v Tung Yang Wee Arthur, the High Court of Singapore has ruled that, while there was no trademark infringement on the part of the defendant, passing off had occurred. The case involved a falling out between the owner of an award-winning pork noodles stall and his nephew over their respective pork noodles stalls. However, based on the circumstances of the case, the plaintiff was awarded only nominal damages.

21 September 2010

Trademark held not to be common misspelling

The registrar of trademarks has rejected an action filed by CBR Textiles GmbH for the invalidation of IC Companys A/S’ mark COMPANYS under Sections 7(1)(a) to (d) and 7(6) of the Singapore Trademarks Act. Among other things, the registrar held that the evidence adduced was insufficient to conclude that 'companys' was a common misspelling of 'companies'.

01 June 2010

Appropriate time to determine whether mark is an “earlier mark” clarified

The High Court has upheld a decision allowing the registration of Nike's NIKE mark in Class 3, despite Campomar’s earlier registration for NIKE in the same class. Among other things, the court held that the appropriate time to determine whether a mark was an “earlier mark” under the Trademarks Act was at the time of the opposition proceedings, and not at the time of application.

24 March 2010

GLAMOUR mark held not to have acquired distinctiveness through use

In Ozone Community Corp v Advance Magazine Publishers Inc, the High Court of Singapore has allowed an appeal by Ozone Community Corp against the decision of the principal assistant registrar of trademarks to refuse Ozone’s application to register the mark HYSTERIC GLAMOUR. Ozone’s application had been opposed by Advance Magazine Publishers Inc, the owner of the GLAMOUR mark.

03 March 2010

EMPEROR MARTIN mark invalidated on grounds of bad faith and fraud

In PT Swakarya Indah Busana v Dhan International Exim Pte Ltd, the High Court has held that Dhan International Exim Pte Ltd's trademark EMPEROR MARTIN had been registered in bad faith and that the registration was tainted with fraud. Among other things, the court found that Dhan never intended to use the mark as registered.

21 January 2010

SGNIC launches Chinese domain names

SGNIC, the domain name registry for Singapore, has announced the launch of second-level Chinese domain names. During Phase 2, which started on January 7 2010 and ends on February 18 2010, trademark owners may apply for second-level Chinese domain names under certain conditions.

15 January 2010

Louis Vuitton defeated on appeal in 'quatrefoil' case

In City Chain Stores (S) Pte Ltd v Louis Vuitton Malletier, the Court of Appeal of Singapore has overturned a decision of the trial judge in which the latter had found in favour of Louis Vuitton Malletier in a dispute involving its famous 'quatrefoil' device. Interestingly, the court considered two approaches to the issue of what would amount to infringement.

20 November 2009

MediaCorp fails to prevent registration of red 'A' logo on appeal

In MediaCorp News Pte Ltd v Astro All Asia Networks PLC, the High Court of Singapore has dismissed MediaCorp News Pte Ltd’s appeal against a decision of the principal assistant registrar in which the latter had dismissed MediaCorp's opposition against the registration of Astro All Asia Networks PLC's logo. The parties both use logos representing a red triangle or letter 'A'.

12 November 2009

Hugo Boss successfully opposes registration of BOSS for cigarettes

In Reemtsma Cigarettenfabriken GmbH v Hugo Boss AG, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore has upheld Hugo Boss AG's opposition against the registration of the trademark BOSS for tobacco products. This case is part of an ongoing worldwide battle between the parties over use of the mark BOSS for cigarettes.

06 October 2009

Mobil defeated on appeal in MOBIS Case

In Mobil Petroleum Company Inc v Hyundai Mobis, the Singapore Court of Appeal has rejected an opposition by Mobil Petroleum Company Inc, the owner of the MOBIL mark, against the registration of the trademark MOBIS. Among other things, the court held that use of the MOBIS mark by Hyundai Mobis would not indicate a connection between Hyundai's goods and Mobil.

13 July 2009

No likelihood of confusion between MIO marks, says court

In Mitac International Corporation v Singapore Telecommunications Ltd, the High Court has dismissed an action filed by Mitac International Corporation, a manufacturer of personal digital assistants and global positioning system devices, against Singapore Telecommunications Ltd, Singapore's leading telecommunications group. Mitac claimed that SingTel had infringed its MIO marks and sought to invalidate SingTel's own MIO marks.

07 May 2009

Landmark decision on protection of well-known marks issued

In Novelty Pte Ltd v Amanresorts Ltd, the Court of Appeal of Singapore has recognized that Amanresorts Ltd's AMAN marks are well known in Singapore. The court clarified that only marks that are “well known to the public at large in Singapore” are entitled to protection against use of a similar or identical mark for dissimilar goods or services even in the absence of a likelihood of confusion.

16 April 2009

Use of unauthorized beverage bases infringes KICKAPOO marks

In The Monarch Beverage Company (Europe) Ltd v Kickapoo (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, the High Court has held that Kickapoo (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd had infringed the KICKAPOO marks by selling Kickapoo product made from unauthorized beverage bases. Among other things, the court held that the infringement of the KICKAPOO marks by Kickapoo Malaysia could not be excused on the basis of mitigation of loss.

07 April 2009

Court clarifies when trademark becomes “common name in the trade”

In Wing Joo Loong Ginseng Hong (Singapore) Co Pte Ltd v Qinghai Xinyuan Foreign Trade Co Ltd, the Court of Appeal of Singapore has considered for the first time whether a trademark had become a “common name in the trade” and the meaning of the phrase “customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade”.