Chap Mei Plastic Toys Manufactory Ltd. v. Vereson Ltd.

HCA018605/1999

HCA 18605/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 18605 OF 1999

Coram: Hon. Sakhrani J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 24 February 2000

Date of Judgment: 24 February 2000

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

1. The Plaintiff asks for summary judgment against the Defendant in this action. The Plaintiff's claim is in respect of the Defendant's infringement of the Plaintiff's registered design registered in United Kingdom as number 2057279 on 26 June 1996 in respect of "a toy gun".

2. The evidence that has been filed on behalf of the Plaintiff makes it plain that the Defendant has offered for sale and has admitted to manufacturing toy sets in particular, "W.S.G.S. PLAY EQUIPMENT" toy sets which include a toy gun which has been produced by the Defendant. These toy guns, on a visual comparison, are an infringement of the Plaintiff's registered design. They are virtually identical The Plaintiff has been selling its toy guns as part of a play equipment in packaging which clearly contains a copyright notice and it is clearly stipulated in the Plaintiff's packaging that there are design registrations.

3. The Defendants have included their version of the toy gun which is an infringement of the Plaintiff's registered design in their catalogue. In their catalogue they proudly claim that they are a Hong Kong based company and have three manufacturing factories located in Guangdong Province of China. They also proudly claim that an important asset in the running of their business in the past decade is the fact that they are backed by a team of highly skilled designers and professional managers which enables a high productivity workflow.

4. The Defence that has been filed claiming that the Defendant has no knowledge whatsoever regarding the toy gun as mentioned in the Statement of Claim is, in my judgment, incredible bearing in mind the evidence. The Defendant has not filed any affirmation in these proceedings. Also, the allegation that the Defendant has never manufactured toys and does not own any factories in China is likewise incredible in the light of what I have stated is contained in their own catalogue. Quite apart from that, a Mr Yu of the Defendant confirmed to the investigator that the Defendant's "W.S.G.S PLAY EQUIPMENT" playset, which includes the toy gun, was manufactured by the Defendant's factory in Shantou. There has been no affirmation filed by the Defendant denying this.

5. In the circumstances, none of the matters raised in the Defence amounts to a triable issue. I am satisfied that the Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment.

Representation:

Mr. C.W. Ling instructed by M/s Victor Chu & Co. for Plaintiff

Defendant in person being absent