GO WIRELESS LTD AND OTHERS v. SIMERAY JANNICK FACQUES AND OTHERS)

GO WIRELESS LTD AND OTHERS v. SIMERAY JANNICK FACQUES AND OTHERS)

The appeal was dismissed because the proposed joinder of defendants alleged only unauthorised sublicensing and infringement which depended on the prior determination of whether the 1st plaintiff had been granted an exclusive worldwide licence by the appellant; therefore the infringement claims should await...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
GO WIRELESS LTD AND OTHERS v. SIMERAY JANNICK FACQUES AND OTHERS)
Parties
1st Plaintiff; 1st Defendant (counterclaim): GO WIRELESS LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: THINKWAY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): MICHAEL SIVAN; 4th Plaintiff; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): JM CONCEPTS LIMITED; 1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): SIMERAY JANNICK JACQUES (also cited as SIMERAY JANNICK FACQUES); 2nd Defendant: INOSPARK LIMITED; 4th Defendant (discontinued): SPIN MASTER LTD
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 January 2012
Case Number
HCA1480/2010
Procedural Posture
Original Action With Counterclaim Relating to Patent Ownership and Infringement / Appeal From Master’s Interlocutory Decision on Joinder and Costs (decision of Deputy High Court Judge)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Master Ko’s refusal to join additional defendants affirmed; procedural timelines extended; costs ordered against appellant
Legal Topics
Patent Ownership, Patent Infringement, Joinder of Parties, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Foreign Law as Expert Evidence, Costs
Source Language
en
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Evidence Contract Patent Ownership Patent Infringement Joinder of Parties Service Out of Jurisdiction +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GO WIRELESS LIMITED

1st Plaintiff; 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

THINKWAY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

MICHAEL SIVAN

3rd Plaintiff; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

JM CONCEPTS LIMITED

4th Plaintiff; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim)

SIMERAY JANNICK JACQUES (also cited as SIMERAY JANNICK FACQUES)

1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

INOSPARK LIMITED

2nd Defendant

SPIN MASTER LTD

4th Defendant (discontinued)

Procedural Posture

Original Action With Counterclaim Relating to Patent Ownership and Infringement / Appeal From Master’s Interlocutory Decision on Joinder and Costs (decision of Deputy High Court Judge)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed defendants could be joined to the counterclaim under Order 15 rule 3
  2. 2 Whether claims of unauthorised sublicensing and infringement should be determined in the same action as ownership
  3. 3 Whether the forgery allegation against Mr Albert Chan is a cause of action and basis for joinder

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the proposed joinder of defendants alleged only unauthorised sublicensing and infringement which depended on the prior determination of whether the 1st plaintiff had been granted an exclusive worldwide licence by the appellant; therefore the infringement claims should await resolution of the ownership/licence issue and were not properly joined under O.15 r.3. The forgery allegation did not amount to a proper cause of action for joinder, and French law could not be relied on without leave to adduce expert evidence; joinder would also cause delay and disrupt the timetable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Master Ko’s refusal to join additional defendants affirmed; procedural timelines extended; costs ordered against appellant

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to file fair copy of re-amended defence and counterclaim within 7 days