slide 1

BRIEF FACTS
The case of the applicant is that it has been manufacturing the wind powered roof ventilators of mushroom of dome shape since the year 2004.  And it was not aware that the said design has illegally been registered in this country as Industrial Design No.00321 at the Industrial Property Tribunal. The registration of the said Design is contrary to Section 84(2) of the Industrial property Act 2001 as the design is meant to achieve technical results.  It is also alleged that the respondent mislead, the registering authority by stating that it was creator of the design while the said design is/was widely in use.

ISSUES
1.    Whether the court had the jurisdiction to hear the matter on registration of a design under the Industrial property Act 2001?
2.    That the respondent is not the inventor of the said Industrial design.
3.     The Industrial design only serves the purposes of obtaining a technical result for Turbine Roof Ventilators. 
4.      That the respondent is not a bona fide proprietor of the Industrial design for Turbine Roof Ventilators and the registration of the design for sale purpose was fraudulent and/or consisted of material non-disclosure. 

RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
ISSUE 1.
The court found that the tribunal could determine the dispute within the shortest time possible in an environment commensurate to the dispute between the parties.  The tribunal has powers to revoke or invalidate any patent, utility model or Industrial design registration upon getting sufficient reasons for doing so. However, that did not as well mean that the court did not have powers to deal in the matter but the tribunal was better placed to hear matters under the Industrial Property Act.
ISSUE 2. 
As to whether the Respondent is the inventor or not of the Industrial design, the court found that the same needs to be examined before such a conclusion is arrived at.

ISSUE 3.
As to whether the Industrial design only serves the purposes of obtaining a technical result for Turbine Roof Ventilators, the judge commented that, the Industrial property Act 2001 prohibits the registration of an Industrial design which serves the purposes of obtaining a technical result for a particular product. That is why under Section 58(1), it is stated that the rights under the patent shall extend only to acts done for Industrial or Commercial purposes, hence the Act specifically and categorically outlaws the registration of designs meant to achieve technical results. The same is emphasized under Section 84(2) of the Industrial property Act

ISSUE 4.
As to whether the Respondent was bona fide proprietor of the Industrial design for Turbine Roof Ventilators and the registration of the design for sale purpose was a question that the judge was of the view that it should have been determined by the Tribunal due to its expertise in such matters. 

CONCLUSION
The parties were to bear their own costs and the matter was hence referred to the Tribunal

Newsletter

Join our newsletter for CIPIT news through subscriptions!

SEND

Social Media

    

Contact Us

TEL : (254) 703 034 612