RJP ELECTRONICS LTD v. FAR EAST UNITED ELECTRONICS LTD

RJP ELECTRONICS LTD v. FAR EAST UNITED ELECTRONICS LTD

Having found that there is a serious issue to be tried but that the balance of convenience and preservation of the clarified status quo do not justify interlocutory relief, and accepting the defendants' undertaking to keep full sales accounts, the court refused to make an order granting the interlocutory injunction...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RJP ELECTRONICS LTD v. FAR EAST UNITED ELECTRONICS LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: RJP ELECTRONICS LTD.; Defendant: FAR EAST UNITED ELECTRONICS LTD.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 September 1983
Case Number
HCA10952/1983
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Intellectual Property (passing Off, Copyright, Registered Design) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Trial
Outcome
No order on the application (interlocutory injunction refused); action certified fit for a speedy trial
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Copyright Infringement, Registered Design, Interim Injunction, Balance of Convenience, Status Quo
Source Language
en
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Equity Passing Off Copyright Infringement Registered Design Interim Injunction Balance of Convenience +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RJP ELECTRONICS LTD.

Plaintiff

FAR EAST UNITED ELECTRONICS LTD.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Intellectual Property (passing Off, Copyright, Registered Design) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing and selling the contested ruler/clock/calculator product pending trial
  2. 2 Whether damages are an adequate remedy for the plaintiffs or defendants
  3. 3 Which party would suffer greater irreparable harm pending trial

Ratio Decidendi

Having found that there is a serious issue to be tried but that the balance of convenience and preservation of the clarified status quo do not justify interlocutory relief, and accepting the defendants' undertaking to keep full sales accounts, the court refused to make an order granting the interlocutory injunction and certified the action fit for a speedy trial.

Court Disposition

No order on the application (interlocutory injunction refused); action certified fit for a speedy trial

Orders

  • No order on the application
  • Defendants to keep an account of all sales of their ruler calculator until the hearing of the action