Judgment Header
Intuition Publishing Ltd v Intuition Consulting Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 149
Loading…
[2012] SGHC 149
General Division of the High Court of Singapore25 Jul 2012Suit No 545 of 2010
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 2 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Later cases and laws citing this decision
“en that all three subsections require that the infringer use a sign in the course of trade which is identical or similar to the trade mark (see Intuition Publishing Ltd v Intuition Consulting Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 149 at [17]), it was necessary for USS to have pleaded the material facts showing how STEAS had used a sign”
“what the average consumer would recall (ie, what is outstanding and memorable about the mark or distinctiveness in a “non-technical” sense). In Intuition Publishing Ltd v Intuition Consulting Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 149, the High Court essentially adopted the “non-technical” distinctiveness analysis (without explicitly coi”
Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Judgment Header
Intuition Publishing Ltd v Intuition Consulting Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 149
Case Metadata
Case No: Suit No 545 of 2010
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2012-07-25
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.