The court emphasizes damages must restore the injured party's position, focusing on profits from infringement, and reaffirms statutory limits on damages.

A. Introduction

[1] This Court had earlier allowed the Plaintiff's claim and directed that the damages be assessed.

[2] For the purposes of this application, I reproduce relevant parts of the Grounds of the Decision of the Mohd Radzi bin Harun J that was delivered on 7 June 2023. The judgment of Justice Mohd Radzi bin Harun has since been confirmed by the Court of Appeal:

[78] This Court found that the Defendant's reliance on the case of Chuah Aik King is misplaced, as the facts here and the facts in that case can be distinguished in the following manner:

(i) the event of the raid is not disputed;

(ii) the Defendant's own witnesses have admitted to all the relevant facts pertaining to the raid;

(iii) even putting aside the raid, the Defendant's infringing acts are already established by the Defendant's own evidence and admissions of designs and sales as follows:

a) the disputed designs fall under the collections named "Alaaina Instant Shawl"‌ and "Noura Printed Shawl"‌, and stock code being 15410054 or 15410055 33;

b) the Defendant sold RM524.000 worth of units of shawls/tudungs comprising the Infringing Products incorporating 8 of the 9 designs of the Plaintiffs Works between June 2017 and July 2019;

[3] Therefore, the High Court had earlier found that the Defendant sold RM524,000.00 worth of the infringing products. I am bound by the said decision, and I am not in any position to make any determination that is contrary to the reasoning of the learned Judge. According to the calculation provided by the Plaintiffs' solicitors this would equate to the sale of 9, 179 units of the infringing products.

B. Assessment Of Damages — Decision Of Court

[4] It is trite that damages for the infringement of trademark is laid down under s 37 of the Copyright Act 1987 , which is reproduced below:

-

"(1) Infringements of copyrights and the prohibited acts under ss 36A and 36B shall be actionable at the suit of the owner of the copyright and, in any action for such an infringement or prohibited act, the Court may grant the following types of relief:

(a) an order for injunction;

(b) damages;

(c) an account of profits;

(d) statutory damages of not more than twenty-five thousand ringgit for each work, but not more than five hundred thousand ringgit in the aggregate; or

(e) any other order as the Court deems fit.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), all such relief shall be available to the plaintiff in an action under subsection 36A(3) except for statutory damages.

(3) In making an award under paragraph (1)(b), the Court may also make an order under paragraph (1)(c) for an account of any profits attributable to the infringement or prohibited act that have not been taken into account in computing the damages.

(4) Except as provided in subsection (3), the types of relief referred to in paragraphs (1)(b), (c) and (d) are mutually exclusive.

(5) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(d), all parts of a collective work shall constitute one work.

(6) Where in an action under this section it is established that an infringement or a prohibited act under s 36A or 36B was committed but it is also established that at the time of the infringement or commission of the prohibited act the defendant was not aware, and had no reasonable grounds for suspecting, that the act was an infringement of the copyright or prohibited under s 36A or s 36B, the plaintiff shall not be entitled under this section to any damages against the defendant in respect of the infringement or commission of the prohibited act, but shall be entitled to an account of profits or statutory damages whether or not any other relief is granted under this section.

(7) Where in an acti