For our clients and friends who wish to keep up to date with the legal scene in Singapore and the rest of Asia, or find the latest discussions on legislative updates and summaries of decisions rendered by the courts, please do sign up to receive our e-newsletters. With so many jurisdictions under our wings, it is no wonder that our editorial team is constantly in a flurry of activity.

Consorzio di Tutela della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco v Australian Grape and Wine Incorporated [2023] SGCA 37
The Court of Appeal has allowed “Prosecco”, after careful consideration of the relevant provision in Singapore’s Geographical Indication Act, to be registered in Singapore as a Geographical Indication (GI). Ultimately, it was found that there was insufficient evidence to show that the average Singaporean consumer was likely to be misled by the use of the same term on wines sold within its shores.

HMV Brand Pte. Ltd. v Yongfeng Trade Co., Limited [2023] SGIPOS 7
After a paper hearing, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore has invalidated a trade mark registered in the form of the famous logo of a dog looking at a gramophone internationally recognised as logo for HMV (the music store). The applicant HMV Brand successfully argued that the mark was registered under bad faith.

Gan Eng Joo Onassis & SG Mr Kopi Private Limited [2023] SGIPOS MED 1
A dispute between two Singapore entities, Mr Kopi and Sg Mr Kopi Pte Ltd over the registration of the latter’s trade mark was successfully resolved through mediation by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center. This mediation was done under IPOS’ REMPS, a scheme which reimburses parties with mediation costs of up to S$14,000.

Baidu Online Network Technology (Beijing) Co Ltd v Baidu Europe BV ([2023] SGIPOS 2)
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has ruled on the invalidation of trade marks registered by an infamous trade mark troll, reassuring established and well-known companies that their marks will be protected against those who would hijack their marks for their own gain or nefarious purposes.

Siemens Industry Software Inc. vs Inzign Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 50
The Singapore High Court has ruled on the doctrine of vicarious liability and its applicability in copyright infringement. The court found that employers should manage their employees appropriately to prevent secondary liability from being imposed in such situations.

Ong Heng Chuan v Ong Teck Chuan and others [2021] SGHC 46
The Court of Appeal has issued a decision on shareholder minority oppression, emphasising that oppression actions only apply where a wrong has been caused to a minority shareholder in their personal capacity, as opposed to a wrong to the company.

Australian Grape and Wine In. V Consorzio di Tutela della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco [2021] SGIPOS 4
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has ruled on an opposition against the registration of “Prosecco” as a geographical indication in respect of wines. IPOS found that the opposition has failed in both of its attempted grounds.

Xiaomi v MiChat [2021] SGIPOS 2
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) held that an opposition by Xiaomi Inc against an applicant who sought to register ‘MiChat’ as the mark has succeeded in some classes but not others. The Registrar in making its decision found that the marks were overall more similar than dissimilar such that there was a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.

Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company v YITAI Plastic Corp [2020] SGIPOS 14
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has ruled on a trade mark opposition matter, and found that the opposition succeeded on the claim of passing-off. In making its decision, the IP Adjudicator made clear the important of having sufficient and relevant evidence to support arguments made for trade mark opposition matters. Even large corporations cannot let their reputation speak for themselves when making a claim that they are well-known.