Azlan Sulaiman J:

Overview

[1] The Plaintiffs action against the Defendant is for infringement of its utility innovation ("III"), namely Utility Innovation No: MY-152248-A ("Ul 248"). The Plaintiff alleges that the carpet underlay with the trademark "TROCELLEN" and/or also known as "Trocellen Carpet Underlay" (collectively, "Defendant's Products") that the Defendant uses, manufactures, imports, supplies, distributes, sells and/or offers for sale and/or deals with in the market infringes Ul 248.

[2] Apart from contending that it is not infringing Ul 248, the Defendant further contends that the Plaintiffs action for infringement is time-barred, and further counterclaims to invalidate Ul 248 on the grounds that:

(i) it is not novel or new; and

(ii) the description and the claim(s) do not comply with the requirements of the Patents Act 1983 and the Patents Regulations, 1986.

The approach

[3] Based on that general overview, the issues to be decided therefore encompass Ul infringement and Ul invalidation. However, in this Judgment they will be dealt with in reverse order, for the simple reason that, if Ul 248 is invalidated, then the consequential effect of that finding is that it sho