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

2017 MarsdenLR 476

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
LOW CHI YONG – Appellant
Versus
LOW CHI HONG & ANOR – Respondent


Table of Content
1. case centers on trade mark ownership. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5)
2. court confirms appellant's trademark ownership and rights. (Para 8 , 9)

[1] The plaintiff, (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), filed a claim at the High Court at Alor Setar against the defendants (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) for infringement of his "Reynox" registered trade mark (the trade mark) and for passing off. Reynox was the trade mark name for liquid fertilizer.

[2] The 1st respondent is the brother of the appellant.

[3] In their defence, the respondents alleged that the registration of the trade mark for liquid fertilizer had been obtained by the appellant by fraud committed on the 1st respondent. The respondents alleged that the trade mark was to be registered in the name of the appellant and the 1st respondent initially, and thereafter to be transferred to the 2nd respondent.

[4] The 2nd respondent was formed to take over the production, business, sale and distribution of the above-mentioned Reynox liquid fertilizer, with the appellant and the 1st respondent each owning equal share in the 2nd respondent. The appellant was also a director in the 2nd respondent.

[5] In short,

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