INJUNCTION: Application for an interim injunction
3 cases · July 2025 to December 2025
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
preliminary objection on the grounds of non-compliance with procedural requirements — Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction –Plaintiff sued defendants for tort of passing off— Whether the defendant should be restrained from using the name "Damascus" or "Damascus Delight", or any other name confusingly similar to that of the Plaintiff's business–Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1 intellectual property infringement — patent infringement — Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction — delay in injunction application — Whether the defendant should be restrained from carrying on business operations- Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1 Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction — Whether the company still holds the manufacturer's license — Whether the company is the product registration holder — Whether the defendant should be restrained from carrying on activities in the property — Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1
preliminary objection on the grounds of non-compliance with procedural requirements — Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction –Plaintiff sued defendants for tort of passing off— Whether the defendant should be restrained from using the name "Damascus" or "Damascus Delight", or any other name confusingly similar to that of the Plaintiff's business–Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1 case
intellectual property infringement — patent infringement — Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction — delay in injunction application — Whether the defendant should be restrained from carrying on business operations- Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1 case
Whether there are serious questions to be tried — Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction — Whether the company still holds the manufacturer's license — Whether the company is the product registration holder — Whether the defendant should be restrained from carrying on activities in the property — Whether damages are an adequate remedy 1 case
Key Statutes
Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Firms
Top Lawyers
Amelda Md Din 1 Ahmad Ezmeel Ahmad Tarmizi 1 Ahmad Zakiuddin Adnan 1 Sitti Salehah Bura Era 1 Tan Jiin Hock 1 Amirah Najihah binti Ameruddin 1 James Ding Tse Wen 1 Woo Xiao Thong 1 Foo Joon Liang 1 Y.Y.Ho 1 Ashley Lee Sze Ching 1 Ranjan N. Chandran 1 Joshua Nathanael Mogan 1 Muhammad Azrul Haziq bin Khirullah 1
Cases
wa-22ip-94-09-2025
GOLDEN DAMASCUS DIVERSIFIES SDN BHD v AROI THAI KITCHEN (PUNCAK ALAM) SDN BHD
11 December 2025
MYHC
wa-22ip-91-08-2025
INFRA PURI SDN. BHD. v AVENUE S2 SDN. BHD.
9 October 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-328-05-2024
XORIX SDN. BHD. (Penerima & Pengurus Dilantik) v 1. ) JARDIN PHARMA BERHAD 2. ) DR. MARYAM AL-BATUL BINTI AZIZUDDIN 3. ) YASIR AYEOP BIN AZIZUDDIN 4. ) MUHAMMAD AL-A'THIQ BIN MARZUKI 5. ) MARZUKI BIN H SALIM
3 July 2025
MYHC