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

2026 MarsdenLR 97527 ; 2026 MarsdenLR 98025

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
EDWIN PARAMJOTHY MICHAEL MUNIANDY, JC
LEUNG KAI FOOK MEDICAL CO PTE LTD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
TJS WORLDWIDE SDN BHD – Respondent
[Suit No: WA-22IP-71-11/2023]



Petitioner Advocates:Lum Kok Kiong,Chai Zhi Yong ,Respondent Advocate: Mohamed Ibrahim,Nor Aziah

JUDGMENT

Edwin Paramjothy Michael Muniandy JC:

(Assessment Of Damages)

A. Introduction

[1] These are my grounds of judgment in respect of the plaintiffs' assessment of damages, consequent upon the entry of summary judgment against the defenandt on 2 August 2024 ("the Order"). Pursuant to the Order, liability was established in favour of the plaintiffs on their claims for trademark infringement and the tort of passing off, with damages to be assessed.

[2] The Plaintiffs in this suit are Leung Kai Fook Medical Co Pte Ltd ("the 1st Plaintiff"), a company incorporated in Singapore, and Leung Kai Fook Medical Sdn Bhd ("the 2nd Plaintiff"), a company incorporated in Malaysia (collectively, "the Plaintiffs"). The defenandt is TJS Worldwide Sdn Bhd, a company incorporated in Malaysia which operates a small retail business at the 3rd Floor, Plaza GM, No 12, Lorong Haji Taib 5, Off Jalan Raja Laut, 50350 Kuala Lumpur.

[3] The Plaintiffs commenced this action by way of Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim dated 27 November 2023, premised upon the Defenandt's alleged infringement of the Plaintiffs' registered trademarks and the tort of passing off in relation to counterfeit Axe Brand Medicated Oil products found at the Defenandt's business premises.

[4] The Defenandt filed a Defence and Counterclaim dated 10 January 2024, to which the plaintiffs replied on 24 January 2024. On 25 March 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a summary judgment Application (Encl 12) pursuant to O 14 of the Rules of 2012 (ROC 2012), together with an application to strike out the defenandt's Counterclaim (Encl 15).

[5] It is significant to note that the defenandt failed, refused and/or neglected to file any affidavit in opposition to the summary judgment Application. On 2 August 2024, this Court , having considered the merits of the application, allowed the summary judgment Application and entered judgment in favour of the plaintiffs. The defenandt's Counterclaim was also struck out. No appeal was filed by the defenandt against the Order, nor was any stay of execution sought.

[6] Accordingly, by the operation of the Order dated 2 August 2024, the defenandt's liability predicated on trademark infringement and the tort of passing off is final and conclusive. The only remaining matter for this Court 's determination is the quantum of damages to be awarded to the Plaintiffs pursuant to paras (6)–(10) of the Order.

[7] The Plaintiffs thereafter filed a Notice for Directions dated 30 August 2024 (Encl 38) seeking the assessment of damages. A Notice of Appointment of Assessment of Damages was issued on 7 February 2025 (Encl 44). The Plaintiffs filed their affidavit in support for the assessment of damages affirmed by Wong Kean Ewe on 7 February 2025 ("PAIS"). The Defenandt filed its Affidavit in Reply affirmed by Intan Nurain binti Ruzainor on 5 March 2025 ("DAIR"). The Plaintiffs thereafter filed an Affidavit in Reply affirmed by Wong Kean Ewe on 14 March 2025.

B. Background Facts

[8] The Plaintiffs are the common law and registered proprietors of the following trademarks in Malaysia, which are and have at all material times been valid and subsisting:

(Collectively referred to as "the Arm & Axe Marks")

[9] The Axe Brand Medicated Oil is one of the leading brands of medicated oil in Malaysia and globally. The Plaintiffs have a longstanding history of more than 90 years of heritage in Malaysia and worldwide. The brand is well-known and the Plaintiffs have expended substantial sums over the years in advertising and promotional expenses to build and maintain the goodwill and reputation associated with the Arm & Axe Marks.

[10] At all material times up to the filing of the Writ, the defenandt had been importing, supplying, distributing, selling and/or offering for sale goods bearing the Arm & Axe Marks which were not produced or authorized by the Plaintiffs ("the Counterfeit Goods"), without the licence and/or authority of the Plaintiffs ("the Offending Acts").

[11] On 13 March 2023, the Plaint

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 Back to top