REMEX INTERNATIONAL TIME LTD AND OTHERS v. REMTEX ELECTRONICS LTD

REMEX INTERNATIONAL TIME LTD AND OTHERS v. REMTEX ELECTRONICS LTD

The court granted the plaintiffs' application in part because the balance of convenience favoured protecting the plaintiffs' goodwill and preventing potential irreparable harm; the defendant had undertaken to cease using 'Ramtex' on watches and to disclose documents, so paragraphs 1 and 2 and paragraph 4 (with 'trademark' substituted for 'name') were ordered, while the wholesale delivery up sought in paragraph 3 was refused.

Citation
REMEX INTERNATIONAL TIME LTD AND OTHERS v. REMTEX ELECTRONICS LTD
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Remex International Time Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Remex Electronics Limited; 3rd Plaintiff: International Precision Time Limited; 4th Plaintiff: Remex Holdings Limited; Defendant: Ramtex Electronics Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 March 1981
Case Number
HCA772/1981
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction / In Chambers (interlocutory)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted in part
Legal Topics
Confusion of Names, Goodwill Protection, Interim Injunctive Relief, Balance of Convenience, Delivery Up Orders
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Trade Mark Law Passing Off Equity Interlocutory Relief Confusion of Names Goodwill Protection Interim Injunctive Relief Balance of Convenience +1 more

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Remex International Time Limited

1st Plaintiff

Remex Electronics Limited

2nd Plaintiff

International Precision Time Limited

3rd Plaintiff

Remex Holdings Limited

4th Plaintiff

Ramtex Electronics Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction / In Chambers (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's use of the name 'Ramtex' is likely to cause confusion with the plaintiffs' 'Remex' name and damage plaintiffs' goodwill
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm absent interlocutory relief
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting the orders sought, including delivery up of material bearing 'Ramtex'

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the plaintiffs' application in part because the balance of convenience favoured protecting the plaintiffs' goodwill and preventing potential irreparable harm; the defendant had undertaken to cease using 'Ramtex' on watches and to disclose documents, so paragraphs 1 and 2 and paragraph 4 (with 'trademark' substituted for 'name') were ordered, while the wholesale delivery up sought in paragraph 3 was refused.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted in part

Orders

  • Order in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 of the summons granted
  • Order in terms of paragraph 4 of the summons granted with the word 'trademark' substituted for 'name' before 'Ramtex'