Friday Dec 13, 2024
Friday Dec 13, 2024
Monday, 23 July 2018 00:26 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
In one of the first cases filed in Sri Lanka in respect of an infringement of the Layout design of an Integrated Circuit, on or around 6 July 2018, A.M.T. Nirmala, a young inventor from an engineering background instituted action against Sri Lanka Telecom PLC and Sri Lanka Telecom (Services) Ltd. under the Intellectual Property Act No. 36 of 2003 had sought to restrain the Defendants from disclosing and/or making use of the Undisclosed/Confidential/ Confidential Commercially Sensitive Information which has allegedly been illegally obtained from A.M.T. Nirmala, the Plaintiff.
When this matter was taken up on 16 July, Sri Lanka Telecom PLC and Sri Lanka Telecom (Services) Ltd. who were summoned, gave a Court an undertaking that the Sri Lanka Telecom PLC and Sri Lanka Telecom (Services) Ltd. will not either manufacture, sell or use any equipment which incorporates the Intellectual Property of the Plaintiff until court inquires into the interim injunction application by the Plaintiff. Further the Defendants reserved their right to formulate objections in respect of the Plaintiff’s case pursuant to examining the documents submitted under confidential cover by the Plaintiff marked as X1 to X6 which had been deposited in the safe custody of Court.
This case was initially supported on 6 July where the Plaintiff through his Plaintiff had alleged that the Defendants pursuant to requesting the Plaintiff to submit a prototype of the Plaintiff’s ‘Power Strip with Lightning Surge and Over Voltage Protection Device’ for testing purposes, had thereafter illegally forced open the Plaintiff’s prototype and inspected the technology within the Plaintiff’s invention without the consent of the Plaintiff, especially in the backdrop that it was informed to the Defendants that the Plaintiff’s device is part of a Patent Application and submitted confidentially for the purposes of testing.
The Learned High Court Judge M. Ahsan R. Marikar on 6 July 2018, being satisfied with the Plaintiff’s case had issued notices of Interim Injunctions and Summons on the Defendants preventing the Defendants from making use and/or disclosing such Undisclosed/Confidential/ Commercially Sensitive Business Information illegally obtained by the Plaintiff in respect of the functionality of the Plaintiff’s device. Further, on 6 July 2018, Learned Judge also had permitted the Plaintiff’s application to support for the Enjoining Orders in respect of the Undisclosed/Confidential/Commercially Sensitive Business Information in respect of the device subject to the Patent Application and the Layout Design of the Integrated Circuit therein in the event an undertaking for non-use and disclosure was not given by the Defendants.
The Plaintiff was represented by Nishan Premathiratne, Janith Fernando and Migara Cabral, Attorneys at Law on the instructions of M/s Julius & Creasy, Attorneys at Law.
The Defendants were represented by Lasantha Hettiarachchi, Medawani Thilakaratne, Sara Miskin and Himath Silva, Attorneys at Law on the instructions of Sonali Samaranayake, Attorney at Law.
This matter will be called again on 6 August 2018 for objections to be filed by the Defendants.
