Abdul Malik Ishak J:

[1] This was the plaintiff's application for summary judgment in encl 9 dated 24 October 1997 under O 14 of the Rules of the High , 1980 ('RHC') against the defendant for infringement of the plaintiff's copyright in respect of artistic and literary works under the Copyright Act 1987.

[2] Enclosure 9 was filed on 29 October 1997 and it was supported by an affidavit of Gan Lee Beng that was affirmed on 24 October 1997 and filed on 29 October 1997 as reflected in encl 8. The defendant through Loi Tuan Ee affirmed an affidavit on 6 December 1997 in encl 19 to rebut encl 8. The plaintiff through Gan Lee Beng in encl 18 affirmed an affidavit in reply on 12 December 1997 which was filed on 16 December 1997 to counter encl 19. The plaintiff's writ of summons and the statement of claim in encl 2 were filed on 2 August 1997 while the defendant entered their memorandum of appearence in encl 4 on 22 October 1997 which was filed on 24 October 1997. The defendant filed their statement of defence and counterclaim as per encl 11 on 12 November 1997.

[3] It is apparent that the plaintiff filed their O 14 application after the defendant had entered their appearance and before the filing of the statement of defence and counterclaim.

[4] The plaintiff is a locally incorporated company and a popular and well known manufacturer of consumer products. For the purpose of the present exercise, the plaintiff manufactured, distributed, marketed and sold various consumer products in particular floor cleaner products known as "Super Active Kleen Floor". The defendant, on the other hand, is also a locally incorporated company dealing in consumer products and sold their floor cleaner products either through its agents, distributors, retailers and its licensees under the brand name "LEO".

[5] By way of a summary, the plaintiff sought for the following prayers in encl 9:

(a) An injunction against the defendant preventing the defendant from infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the artistic and literary works on the back label of its 'Kiwi Super Active Kleen Floor' ("label") by manufacturing, distributing, stocking, selling and/or offering for sale without the plaintiff's consent or permission the said artistic and literary works or any substantial part thereof in any material form whatsoever as more particularly set forth in para (1) of encl 9.

(b) An enquiry as to damages including aggravated damages for the defendant's infringement of the plaintiff's copyright aforesaid and payment to the plaintiff of all such sums found due and payable with interest thereon after such inquiry.

(c) As an alternative to prayer (b), an account of profits of all sums received by the defendant in respect of the said infringement and payment thereof to the plaintiff of all sums found due upon taking such account.

(d) For the delivery up and disclosure by the defendant and/or destruction on oath of all the defendant's infringing works and labels which are identical or substantial reproduction of the plaintiff's copyrighted literary works particularised in para 4 of encl 9.

(e) An order for full discovery of document as particularised in para 5 of encl 9.

(f) An order that the defendant do cause to be published a public apology in five national newspapers of the plaintiff's choice at the defendant's own expense on such terms and conditions to be approved by the plaintiff.

(g) That the costs to be borne by the defendant.

[6] The affidavit of Gan Lee Beng in encl 8 revealed that the plaintiff hinged their case for an O 14 application against the defendant for breach of copyright in the artistic and literary works in the label. Whereas in the statement of claim the plaintiff alleged breach of copyright in the literary works comprised in the label. It would therefore be apparent that the reliefs sought by the plaintiff as reflected in encl 8 and the grounds upon which they were based were wider than what was pleaded in the statement of claim. The plaintiff pleaded and