SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1966 MarsdenLR 372

ABDUL AZIZ
REDLAND TILES LTD & ORS – Appellant
Versus
KUA HONG BRICK TILE WORKS – Respondent


Advocates:
For the plaintiffs - HL Wrigglesworth; M/s. Wriggleworth & Co. For the defendants - Isahak bin Abdul Hamid; M/s. Isahak Hamid & Co.

JUDGMENT

Abdul Aziz J:

(delivering oral judgement): This is an action for infringement of a registered design and not an action in relation to trade marks. Therefore, the question of passing off has no relevance and the question of the names of the various products also has no relevance.

Plaintiffs No. 1, i.e. Redland Tiles Limited are the proprietors of a valid registered design bearing No. 862055 for roofing tiles, the novelty features of which, as set out in the certificate, lie in the feature or shape and configuration of the article as shown in the representation annexed thereto, a specimen of which was exhibited in Court and produced for inspection. By virtue of s. 2 of the United Kingdom Designs (Protection) Ordinance, 1949 the registered proprietors enjoy, in the Federation, the like rights and privileges as though the certificate has been issued in the United Kingdom with an extension to the Federation. Plaintiffs No. 2, i.e. Concrete Industries (North Malaya) Ltd. are the licensees of plaintiffs No. 1 to manufacture tiles for sale in Malaya. It was alleged that the defendants manufactured cement tiles of the like shape and configuration as the design registered in the Un

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top