C8 no 113738 daLed 03/19/2002

eLlLloner Llldad C kho (kLC CCSML1lCS LA8C8A1C8?)

8espondenLs Summervllle Ang 1lam Chay

1hls ls case for eLlLlon for revlew on CerLlorarl of CA's declslon seLLlng aslde and declarlng null and vold Lhe 81C's
order ln granLlng Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon 1he SC denled lLs peLlLlon

Iacts of the case
1 eLlLloner flled a complalnL for ln[uncLlon and damages wlLh prayer for lssuance of wrlL of ln[uncLlon agalnsL Lhe
respondenLs
2 eLlLloner alleges Lhe followlng
a 1he peLlLloner ls Lhe reglsLered owner of Lhe copyrlghLs Chln Chun Su" and Cval laclal Cream
ConLalner/Case" as evldenced by Lhe cerLlflcaLes lf copyrlghL reglsLraLlon no 01338 and no 03678
b Pas a paLenL rlghLs on Chln Chun Su and uevlse and Chln Chun Su for medlcaLed Cream
c 1haL such paLenL rlghL has been purchased from CulnLln Cheng Lhe reglsLered owner ln Lhe
SupplemenLal 8eglsLer of Lhe hlllpplne aLenL Cfflce under 8eglsLraLlon CerLlflcaLe nC 4329
d 8espondenL should be held responslble for lnfrlnglng Lhe copyrlghLs and paLenL of Lhe peLlLloner slnce
l lL ls adverLlslng and selllng peLlLloner's cream producLs under Lhe brand name of Chln Chun Su
ln slmllar conLalners LhaL peLlLloner uses
3 8espondenL alleged
a 1hey are Lhe excluslve and auLhorlzed lmporLer repacker and dlsLrlbuLor of Chln Chun Su producLs
manufacLured by Shun ?l lacLory ln 1alwan
b 1he sald 1alwanese manufacLurlng company auLhorlzes Lhe respondenL Lo reglsLer Lhe Chl Chun Su
medlcaLed Cream wlLh Lhe hll aLenL offlce
c 1he peLlLloner obLalned Lhelr copyrlghL Lhru mlsrepresenLaLlon and falslflcaLlon slnce Lhe auLhorlLy of
CulnLen Cheng has already been LermlnaLed by Lhe sald 1alwanese Company
4 1he 1rlal courL granLed Lhe peLloners appllcaLlon for lssuance of wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon
3 8espondenLs moved for reconslderaLlon buL was denled by Lhe Lrlal courL
6 8espondenLs flled a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl wlLh Lhe CA praylng for Lhe nulllflcaLlon of Lhe sald wrlL of
prellmlnary ln[uncLlon
7 eLlLloner submlLLed Lhelr commenL and almosL a monLh LhereafLer peLlLloner moved Lo dlsmlss Lhe peLlLlon
for vlolaLlon of Supreme CourLs Clrcular no 2891
8 1he CA rendered declslon ln favor of respondenL ulrecLlng Lhe lower courL Lo proceed wlLh Lhe Lrlal and
resolve Lhe lssue ralsed by Lhe parLles on Lhe merlLs
a 8ASlS 1he reglsLraLlon of Lhe Lrademark or brandname Chln Chun Su" under Lhe supplemenLal
reglsLer of Lhe 8ureau of aLenLs 1rademark and 1echnology 1ransfer cannoL be equaLed wlLh Lhe
reglsLraLlon ln Lhe rlnclpal reglsLer whlch ls duly proLecLed by Lrademark Law 1hls ls pursuanL Lo Lhe
rullngs as conLalned ln lo cbemls locoste vs letoooJez
9 1he peLlLloner flled a M8 and followed a moLlon for conLempL of courL and !une 3 1994 CA promulgaLed a
resoluLlon denylng Lhe peLlLloners M8 and for conLempL
10 1he lower courL proceeded wlLh Lhe Lrlal and rendered a declslon
a 8arrlng Lhe peLlLloner from uslng Lhe Lrademark Chln Chun Su
b upholdlng Lhe rlghL of Lhe respondenLs Lo use Lhe same
c 8ecognlzlng Lhe copyrlghL of Lhe peLlLloner over Lhe oval shaped conLalner of her beauLy cream
lSSuLS
1 WheLher or noL a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon can be lssued Lo Lhe peLlLloner?

PLLu
1 As Lo Lhe lssuance of wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon
a 8CvlSlCn Cl 1PL LAW
l lL was held LhaL one of Lhe grounds for Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon ls a proof
LhaL Lhe appllcanL ls enLlLled Lo Lhe rellef demanded and Lhe whole or parL of Lhe rellef conslsL
ln resLralnlng Lhe commlsslon or conLlnuance of Lhe acL or acLs complalned of elLher for a
llmlLed perlod or perpeLually
ll 1haL lL musL show LhaL
1 Lhe lnvaslon of Lhe rlghL soughL Lo be proLecLed ls maLerlal and subsLanLlal
2 1haL Lhe rlghL of Lhe complalnanL ls clear and unmlsLakable
3 1haL Lhere ls an urgenL and paramounL necesslLy for Lhe wrlL Lo prevenL serlous
damage
b A1 1PL CASL A1 8A8
l eLlLloner applled on Lhe basls LhaL she ls enLlLled Lo Lhe use of Lhe Lrademark on Chln Chun Su
and lLs conLalner based on her copyrlghL and paLenL over Lhe same
ll SC PLLu
1 1he prellmlnary ln[uncLlon cannoL be lssued for Lhe reason LhaL Lhe peLlLloner has noL
proven LhaL she has a clear rlghL over Lhe sald name and conLalner Lo Lhe excluslon of
oLhers noL havlng proven Lhe she has reglsLered a Lrademark LhereLo or used Lhe same
before anyone dld
2 1o be enLlLled Lo excluslve use Lhere musL flrsL be reglsLraLlon or used before anybody
else dld
3 1haL Lhe peLlLloner's copyrlghL and paLenL reglsLraLlon of Lhe name and conLalner
would noL guaranLee her rlghL Lo Lhe excluslve use of Lhe same for Lhe reason LhaL Lhey
are noL approprlaLe sub[ecLs of Lhe sald lnLellecLual 1hls ls for Lhe reason LhaL Lhe
name and conLalner of Lhe beauLy cream producL are proper sub[ecL of a Lrademark
c noneLheless lssuance of a flnal ln[uncLlon renders any quesLlon on Lhe prellmlnary ln[uncLlon order
mooL and academlc desplLe Lhe facL Lhe declslon granLlng a flnal ln[uncLlon ls pendlng appeal

2 WheLher Lhe copyrlghL and Lhe paLenL over Lhe name and conLalner of a beauLy cream producL would enLlLle
Lhe reglsLranL Lo Lhe use and ownershlp over Lhe same Lo Lhe excluslon of oLher?
a