Propiedad intelectual Formación en PI Respeto por la PI Divulgación de la PI La PI para... La PI y… La PI en… Información sobre patentes y tecnología Información sobre marcas Información sobre diseños industriales Información sobre las indicaciones geográficas Información sobre las variedades vegetales (UPOV) Leyes, tratados y sentencias de PI Recursos de PI Informes sobre PI Protección por patente Protección de las marcas Protección de diseños industriales Protección de las indicaciones geográficas Protección de las variedades vegetales (UPOV) Solución de controversias en materia de PI Soluciones operativas para las oficinas de PI Pagar por servicios de PI Negociación y toma de decisiones Cooperación para el desarrollo Apoyo a la innovación Colaboraciones público-privadas Herramientas y servicios de IA La Organización Trabajar con la OMPI Rendición de cuentas Patentes Marcas Diseños industriales Indicaciones geográficas Derecho de autor Secretos comerciales Academia de la OMPI Talleres y seminarios Observancia de la PI WIPO ALERT Sensibilizar Día Mundial de la PI Revista de la OMPI Casos prácticos y casos de éxito Novedades sobre la PI Premios de la OMPI Empresas Universidades Pueblos indígenas Judicatura Recursos genéticos, conocimientos tradicionales y expresiones culturales tradicionales Economía Financiación Activos intangibles Igualdad de género Salud mundial Cambio climático Política de competencia Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible Tecnologías de vanguardia Aplicaciones móviles Deportes Turismo PATENTSCOPE Análisis de patentes Clasificación Internacional de Patentes ARDI - Investigación para la innovación ASPI - Información especializada sobre patentes Base Mundial de Datos sobre Marcas Madrid Monitor Base de datos Artículo 6ter Express Clasificación de Niza Clasificación de Viena Base Mundial de Datos sobre Dibujos y Modelos Boletín de Dibujos y Modelos Internacionales Base de datos Hague Express Clasificación de Locarno Base de datos Lisbon Express Base Mundial de Datos sobre Marcas para indicaciones geográficas Base de datos de variedades vegetales PLUTO Base de datos GENIE Tratados administrados por la OMPI WIPO Lex: leyes, tratados y sentencias de PI Normas técnicas de la OMPI Estadísticas de PI WIPO Pearl (terminología) Publicaciones de la OMPI Perfiles nacionales sobre PI Centro de Conocimiento de la OMPI Informes de la OMPI sobre tendencias tecnológicas Índice Mundial de Innovación Informe mundial sobre la propiedad intelectual PCT - El sistema internacional de patentes ePCT Budapest - El Sistema internacional de depósito de microorganismos Madrid - El sistema internacional de marcas eMadrid Artículo 6ter (escudos de armas, banderas, emblemas de Estado) La Haya - Sistema internacional de diseños eHague Lisboa - Sistema internacional de indicaciones geográficas eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediación Arbitraje Determinación de expertos Disputas sobre nombres de dominio Acceso centralizado a la búsqueda y el examen (CASE) Servicio de acceso digital (DAS) WIPO Pay Cuenta corriente en la OMPI Asambleas de la OMPI Comités permanentes Calendario de reuniones WIPO Webcast Documentos oficiales de la OMPI Agenda para el Desarrollo Asistencia técnica Instituciones de formación en PI Apoyo para COVID-19 Estrategias nacionales de PI Asesoramiento sobre políticas y legislación Centro de cooperación Centros de apoyo a la tecnología y la innovación (CATI) Transferencia de tecnología Programa de Asistencia a los Inventores (PAI) WIPO GREEN PAT-INFORMED de la OMPI Consorcio de Libros Accesibles Consorcio de la OMPI para los Creadores WIPO Translate Conversión de voz a texto Asistente de clasificación Estados miembros Observadores Director general Actividades por unidad Oficinas en el exterior Ofertas de empleo Adquisiciones Resultados y presupuesto Información financiera Supervisión
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Leyes Tratados Sentencias Consultar por jurisdicción

WIPO Lex

WIPOLEX043-j

Atrás

High Court of Uganda, Commercial Division [2021]: Migoo Industrial and Trading Company (U) Limited v Rida International Industry (U) Limited (Civil Suit No. 359 of 2019) [2021] UGCommC 145

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2023 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 2: Emerging Issues in Industrial Designs

 

High Court of Uganda [2021]: Migoo Industrial and Trading Company (U) Limited v Rida International Industry (U) Limited (Civil Suit No. 359 of 2019) [2021] UGCommC 145

 

Date of judgment: June 28, 2021

Issuing authority: High Court of Uganda (Commercial Division)

Level of the issuing authority: First Instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Civin( �/span>

Subject matter: Industrial Designs; Enforcement of IP and Related Laws

Plaintiff: Migoo Industrial and Trading Company (U) Limited

Defendant: Rida International Industry (U) Limited

Keywords: Industrial design, Technical function, Infringement

 

Basic facts: The plaintiff’s claim is that it is the registered owner of the trademark MIGOO.  Sometime during the year 2012, the plaintiff’s director procured from China an industrial mold for the production of gumboots and began the production of gumboots under the MIGOO trademark.  These gumboots are sold in Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, Rwanda, Kenya and Tanzania, among other markets.  Around the year 2016, the person that had been contracted in China to design the mold for MIGOO incorporated a company in Uganda named “Rida International Industry Uganda Limited”, and began manufacturing and selling gumboots in the same markets, under the RIDA trademark.  The gumboots manufactured and sold by the defendant under that name are identical to those produced by the plaintiff in design, shape, color and sizes, save that the latter’s are cheaper and of a poorer quality.  The plaintiff claims that, as a result, the defendant’s activities caused confusion in the market and undercut its sales, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff.

 

The plaintiff registered an industrial design to protect its gumboots on February 18, 2019, after several years of having manufactured and sold its gumboots.  However, the defendant had successfully registered its own industrial design six months prior to that of the plaintiff, on August 28, 2018.

 

The plaintiff claimed general and special damages for infringement of its industrial design, passing off and fraud, a permanent injunction restraining further infringement, declarations and costs.

 

Held: The Court found that the key features of the gumboots in issue were the Shaft (the long tube that covers the area from the ankle to the calf which makes the boot so recognizable as a distinctive type of footwear); the Collar (the top edge of the shaft, where one inserts the foot, which is rim-padded for extra strength and comfort); the Vamp (the part of the boot that covers the top of the foot); the Counter (the back lower part of the boot where the heel sits); and the Instep (the arch inside the boot that distinguishes the left from the right foot).

 

The Court found that none of these ornamental aspects of the design were defined exclusively by the technical function of the article.  They had little or nothing to do with the functionality and usability of the product, but were exclusively aesthetic creations determining the external appearance of the product, clearly used to improve the product’s marketability by making it more attractive or appealing.  Further, the Court found that there was considerable scope for the design of such grooves, their individual characteristics and their specific arrangement.  The degree of freedom of the designer in designing such grooves was almost unlimited because such decoration can come in any combination of colors, patterns, and shapes.  The defendant’s designer would have had sufficient freedom in choosing a design, reinforcing the conclusion that if the two designs do not have significant differences, they would produce the same overall impression on a consumer.

 

The Court examined the designs of the plaintiff and defendant side by side.  It found that there was no difference between the designs, and that the defendant’s design was an obvious adaptation of the design of the plaintiff.

 

The Court therefore found that the defendant infringed the plaintiff’s industrial design in respect of the gumboots.  Specifically, the Court found that the defendant had adopted the registered design of the plaintiff and applied it to its own products with a view to cash in on the reputation and goodwill enjoyed by the plaintiff and its products, amounting to confusion and passing off.

 

The Court issued a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its servants, employees, agents or assignees from reproducing the plaintiff’s registered industrial design in the manufacture, importing, offering for sale and selling of gumboots, as well as from stocking gumboots of that design for the purposes of offering them for sale or selling them.

 

The Court also awarded a sum of Ush 5,500,000,000 as general damages and special damages of Ush 6,589,795,284, as well as interest.

 

Relevant holdings in relation to emerging issues in industrial designs:

 

1.    Industrial design, as a category of intellectual property law, refers only to the aesthetic nature of a finished product, and is distinct from any technical or functional aspects.  That is, it is intended to protect features of an industrial article that are aesthetic and are not merely functional aspects of the design.

2.    The design must not, to the proprietor’s knowledge, have been in use by a person other than the applicant at the time that the design was adopted by the applicant.  Where two or more persons have made the same industrial design independently of each other, the person whose application has the earliest filing date or, if priority is claimed, the earliest validly claimed priority date that leads to the registration of an industrial design, has the right to register the industrial design.

3.    Infringement of an industrial design occurs when someone applies a registered industrial design or a design not differing substantially from the registered design, to an article for the purposes of sale, rental, or exposure for sale, without the permission of the owner.

 

Relevant legislation:

The Industrial Property Act, 2014 (Act No. 3 of 2014)