TIGER PICTURES ENTERTAINMENT LTD v ENCORE FILMS PTE LTD
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (7)
Case Significance
Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd v Encore Films Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC 39 was decided by Dedar Singh Gill J in the General Division of the High Court on 9 February 2024, in Originating Claim No 466 of 2022. The judgment records that OC 466 was the first case to be heard substantively under Part 2 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Intellectual Property) Rules 2022. The case concerned copyright infringement. The claimant, Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd, is a company incorporated in the People's Republic of China that distributes and sells films worldwide; its President is Mr Yang Gang (also known as Mr Owen Young), and it has a related Hong Kong entity of the same name. The defendant, Encore Films Pte Ltd, is a Singapore-incorporated company distributing films in Singapore and other Southeast Asian countries.
The defendant did not dispute that it carried out the acts complained of, but submitted that there was a distribution agreement between the parties. The judgment records the court's finding that no agreement was reached between the parties. The catchwords cover Contract (Formation) and Intellectual Property (Copyright, Infringement), and the judgment references the Copyright Act, the Evidence Act and the Patents Act. The claimant was represented by Allen & Gledhill LLP (Justin Tay and Toh Jia Yi); the defendant by Lee & Lee (Tan Tee Jim, Lee Junting Basil and Yang Zhuo Yan).
Summary
This was the first case heard substantively under Part 2 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Intellectual Property) Rules 2022 before the General Division of the High Court, concerning a claim by Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd, a Chinese film distributor, against Encore Films Pte Ltd, a Singapore distributor, over copyright in the Chinese film "Moon Man". The defendant did not dispute carrying out the acts complained of but submitted that a distribution agreement existed between the parties, raising issues of contract formation and copyright infringement. The court found that no agreement had been reached and granted the claimant an injunction restraining further infringement, an order for delivery up and destruction of infringing copies, and an inquiry as to damages or an account of profits, reserving questions of additional damages, interest, and costs to the damages inquiry.
What was significant about Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd v Encore Films Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC 39?
Decided by Dedar Singh Gill J on 9 February 2024, it was the first case heard substantively under Part 2 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Intellectual Property) Rules 2022. The copyright infringement dispute turned on whether a distribution agreement existed between the parties.
What did the court find about the distribution agreement in [2024] SGHC 39?
Encore Films Pte Ltd did not dispute carrying out the acts complained of but argued a distribution agreement existed with Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd. The court found that no agreement was reached between the parties, as recorded in the judgment by Dedar Singh Gill J.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (20)
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 39)