Suggest a correction

Content

IPOS Updates on IP & Tech Dispute Resolution in Singapore: June 2026

Match the official source exactly.

What needs fixing?

Wrong or mistyped textWrong structure or numberingWrong title or detailsDuplicated content

Proposed text

June 2026

Dear readers

Welcome to the latest IP & tech dispute resolution developments in Singapore.

Court decisions

Salutica Allied Solutions Sdn Bhd v Apple South Asia Pte. Ltd. [2026] SGHCR 22

This patent infringement matter concerned Apple’s application for a confidentiality club to govern the disclosure of confidential technical documents.

Salutica is the proprietor of a Singapore patent titled “A System And Method For Transmitting, Storing
Receiving And/Or Retrieving Identification Information Or Data And/Or Pairing Information Or Data
Between Accessories Or Associated Products And Smart Electronic Devices Into And/Or From Any
Distinct Server Or Storage Media”.

Salutica sued Apple for patent infringement, alleging that the specific method used by Apple to transmit and retrieve information to and from iCloud, Apple’s proprietary cloud storage service, infringed its patent. Apple denied infringement and counterclaimed for revocation. Apple sought a two-tier confidentiality regime with a view to protecting its secret process alleged to infringe the claimant’s patent. The higher tier, for Restricted Confidential Documents, would be limited to external counsel and external experts only. The lower tier, for General Confidential Documents, would also allow access by either Mr Joshua Lim (Salutica’s CEO) or Mr Joel Lim (Salutica’s alternate director).

Page 2 of 4
The court allowed the two-tier regime. In so doing, the Assistant Registrar accepted that the documents concerned Apple’s secret process for how the relevant feature operated, and that secret processes sit at the high end of the confidentiality scale. The court also considered Apple’s security concerns, the difficulty of policing misuse, and the early stage of the proceedings. It held that this was an exceptional case justifying external-eyes-only access for the Restricted Confidential
Documents. However, the court refused Apple’s proposed prosecution bar, which would have restricted Salutica’s solicitors and expert from certain patent prosecution-related work. The court found the proposed bar unnecessary and overly broad, noting that the confidential information was more specific than the scope of the proposed restriction.

An appeal has been filed against the decision in part.

Kupetz, Jonathan and others v Terraform Labs Pte Ltd and others [2026] SGHC (I) 9

In another instalment of the long-running litigation arising from the collapse of the algorithmic stablecoin TerraUSD (UST) in May 2022, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC)
considered the claims of 40 represented claimants (out of a total of 275 claimants) in a representative action against Terraform Labs Pte Ltd, Kwon Do Hyeong and Luna Foundation Guard Ltd. The claimants sought damages for losses arising from fraudulent misrepresentations made in connection with UST. The defendants conceded that certain representations were false and had been made fraudulently.  The Court of Appeal’s decision relating to the first tranche, which varied the first instance SICC decision in part, can be found here.

In this second tranche decision, the SICC assessed issues including ownership, reliance, the appropriate cut-off time for assessing damages, quantum, and aggravated damages. The court also gave guidance on the gathering and presentation of evidence in mass claims. While evidence may be collected through open-ended questionnaires—as was done in this case, involving claimants across multiple jurisdictions—the resulting witness statements must ultimately reflect each witness’
evidence in their own words. The SICC also made clear that while AI may be used to assist with structure, grammar and form, it should not be used to generate the substance of a witness’ evidence.

Other IP / tech-adjacent cases which may be of interest

The following recent cases are not IP decisions as such, but may be of interest from a broader technology / IT perspective:
•
Intraworks Strategic Fund I, LP and 3 ors v Prisma AI Corp Pte Ltd & anor [2026] SGHC (I) 8
(commercial / shareholder dispute involving an AI company, concerning investment agreements, minority oppression, alleged contractual breaches and alleged proposed business restructuring / IPO plan)
•
Twitter Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v Media Matters for America [2026] SGHC 134 (technology and online publication dispute involving the X / Twitter platform, defamation, malicious falsehood, service out of jurisdiction, and conflict-of-laws issues arising from statements published online)
•
Skyventure VWT Singapore Pte Ltd v Simba Telecom Pte Ltd [2026] SGHC 133
(telecommunications infrastructure dispute concerning the Telecommunications Act 1999, the COPIF regime, mobile telecommunications equipment installed at the iFly Building, alleged trespass, and damages for continued occupation of space)

Page 3 of 4
IPOS decision

MAN Marken GmbH v VMAN Engine Singapore Pte Ltd [2026] SGIPOS 8

This was a trade mark opposition by MAN Marken GmbH against VMAN Engine Singapore Pte Ltd’s application to register the "
" mark for Class 7 engine-related goods, including diesel engines, gas turbines and marine engines. The opponent relied principally on its earlier “MAN” mark, registered in Class 7 for engines and related goods. The hearing officer dismissed the opposition. The decision turned mainly on marks-similarity. The marks were found to be visually dissimilar to a substantial degree, aurally more dissimilar than similar, and conceptually dissimilar. These findings led to the conclusion that the marks were dissimilar to a significant degree.

The opponent also argued that the application mark had been applied for in bad faith. However, the hearing officer was not persuaded that there was sufficient evidence to support such a finding.

[SUBSIDISED BY IPOS] Upcoming Course: Introduction to International Arbitration (28 August 2026)
IPOS and Ciarb Singapore are jointly organising the Introduction to International Arbitration Course 2026 as an associated event of Singapore IP Week 2026.

The course will be held on 28 August 2026 (Friday), from 9.00am to 5.00pm, at IPOS, and will introduce participants to the principles, framework and procedure of international arbitration, with examples drawn from IP and technology-related disputes.

Through our interactions with leading arbitral institutions, we have observed that arbitration of IP and technology-related disputes is a growing area internationally. This course aims to introduce IP practitioners – particularly younger IP lawyers – to the fundamentals of international arbitration and provide them with greater exposure to this increasingly important dispute resolution mechanism.

The course fee, which enjoys a IPOS subsidy, is S$250 (usual price S$500). Participants who wish to take the online assessment must pay a separate assessment fee of GBP 72 to Ciarb HQ in London.
Participants are also eligible to claim 6.5 CPD points for attending the course.

Course participants will also receive a complimentary pass to the Global Forum on Intellectual
Property (GFIP), the flagship conference of Singapore IP Week 2026 (Days 1 and 2), 26-27 August 2026, worth S$900 excluding GST (including the jointly organised IPOS x Ciarb Singapore interactive panels titled “Appropriate Dispute Resolution for Tech & IP in Singapore (ADR TIPS)” held in the afternoon of 27 August). The complimentary pass is designed to give younger IP and Tech lawyers the opportunity to attend IPOS’ flagship international conference, network with leading practitioners and industry stakeholders, and gain exposure to developments at the intersection of
IP, technology and dispute resolution. Participants attending Singapore IP Week 2026 may also claim CPD points.

Page 4 of 4
Upcoming Seminar: Applying the Magic of Mediation to IP Disputes (12 August 2026)

The next seminar in the Practical IP Enforcement (PIPEs) series, titled “Applying the Magic of
Mediation to IP Disputes: Commercial Outcomes & Ethical Considerations”, will be held on 12 August 2026, from 3.00pm to 5.30pm, at the Guoco Midtown Network Hub.

The lead presenter will be Ms Joyce A Tan. The seminar will be followed by a panel discussion featuring Ms Joyce A Tan, Mr Dixon Soh and Mr Tng Sheng Rong, moderated by Mr Mark Teng. The event is SILE-accredited and carries 2 CPD points, inclusive of 1 MEC point. Registration is priced at
S$136.25, inclusive of GST.

Recently concluded Beijing–Singapore–ASEAN event

IPOS’ International Affairs Division and the Beijing Intellectual Property Office jointly organised
Turning IP Disputes in the Biopharma Industry into Opportunities through Alternative Dispute
Resolution, held online on 14 July 2026. The Chinese-language webinar focused on intellectual property issues arising in the biopharmaceutical sector. Topics discussed included disputes involving patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and technology collaboration arrangements.

If you have any feedback or interesting news to share, please drop us a note at gabriel_ong@ipos.gov.sg.
Archived copies of our previous updates are available at the following link.

What's the problem? (required)

0 / 2,000

Source link (optional)

Describe the problem (and edit the text or pick an issue type) to submit.

Suggestions are submitted anonymously. No account or personal information is required or sent.