MALAYSIA: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND OBLIGATION OF ONLINE PLATFORM PROVIDERS DEFINED BY COURT
A & M Beauty Wellness Sdn. Bhd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff”) v Shopee Mobile Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. (hereinafter referred to “the Defendant”) is a case which concerns the obligations of e-commerce platform providers with reference to any counterfeit or trademark infringing products being offered for sale via their platform.
The Plaintiff is a company which is involved in beauty...
MALAYSIA: TRADERS CAN BE FOUND LIABLE FOR THE TORT OF PASSING-OFF
On 12 February 2019, the Malaysian Court of Appeal delivered a judgement in a case of Lifomax Woodbuild Sdn Bhd v Amsteel Mills Sdn Bhd concerning tort of passing-off.
Lifomax Woodbuild Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as “the Appellant”) appealed against decision of the High Court dated 24 September 2013, which had ruled in favour of the claim of Amsteel Mills Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to...
MALAYSIA: UNDERSTANDING THE VALUE OF TRADEMARKS CO-EXISTENCE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
In the High Court case of Merck KGAA v Xtalic Corporation, Merck KGAA (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff) filed an appeal against the Malaysian Registrar of Trade Marks (hereinafter referred to as the Registrar) dismissal of opposition to the application for registration of a trademark on 2 July 2018.
The Plaintiff is a private limited company incorporated in Germany involved in the...
MALAYSIA: EFFECT OF DISCLAIMERS IN THE SCOPE OF TRADEMARK
On 17 July 2019, the Court of Appeal delivered a judgement in a case of Nor Yanni bt Adom & Anor v Ortus Expert White 1 MLJ 101 concerning breach of dealership agreement, trademark infringement and passing-off.
Ortus Expert White (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondent”) is the owner of a registered trademark of “Royal Expert White” that had a crown device. One Ms. Nor Yanni Binti...
MALAYSIA: BISCUITS BATTLE IN COURT
In the High Court of Malaya case of Munchy Food Industries Sdn Bhd v Huasin Food Industries Sdn Bhd, Munchy Food Industries Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff”) brought an action against Huasin Food Industries Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as “the Defendant”) for trademark infringement and passing off.
The Plaintiff is the owner of LEXUS Mark, which was registered on 23 Jan...
MALAYSIA: JLLP APPEAL’S ALLOWED
On March 2019, the Court of Appeal delivered a judgment in a case of Appraisal Property Management Sdn. Bhd.; JLL Property Services (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd; & Jones Lang Wootton Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “JLLP”) v Singham Sulaiman Sdn. Bhd (hereinafter referred to as “SSSB”) in which the JLLP appealed against the decision of the High Court in the 1st suit, whereby the High Court ruled...
MALAYSIA – PASSING OFF MUCH?
This is the case between Guangzhou Light Industry & Trade Group Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “the 1st Plaintiff”), Guangzhou Eaglecoin Enterprises Group Corporation (also known as Guangdong Cannery) (hereinafter referred to as the “the 2nd Plaintiff”) and Kim Guan Hap Kee Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as the “the 3rd Plaintiff”) and Lintas Superstore Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred as...
MALAYSIA: FOR THE LOVE OF RICE
On 27 March 2019, the Court of Appeal delivered a judgment in a case of Syarikat Faiza Sdn. Bhd & Faiza Bawumi Binti Sayed Ahmad (hereinafter referred to as “1st Plaintiff” and “2nd Plaintiff”, respectively) v Faiz Rice Sdn. Bhd & Fikri bin Abu Bakar (hereinafter referred to as “1st Defendant” and “2nd Defendant”, respectively), in which the dispute relates to the trademarks and...
MALAYSIA: MARKETING GOODS VIA INSTAGRAM IS STILL A TRADE MARK INFRINGEMENT
On 1 March 2019, High Court of Malaya at Kuala Lumpur delivered a judgement to the matter of 30 Maple Sdn. Bhd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) v Siti Safiyyah Binti Mohd Firdaus Chew, an individual (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”).
The Plaintiff is a private limited incorporated under the laws of Malaysia and is engaged in manufacturing, supplying, and promoting the...
MALAYSIA: FOREIGN ENTITY MUST PAY SECURITY COSTS IN ORDER TO INITIATE LITIGATION
This case was in relation to two foreign companies whereby Merck KGaA (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff”) which is involved in the business of pharmaceutical, chemical and life sciences and Xtalic Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “the Defendant”) which is involved in the business relating to nanostructured materials with regards to a dispute about the security for costs...