AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD. CALABAR VS JOSEPH AGBANYIM
September 10, 2025J. A. IREM VS OBUBRA DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS
September 10, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 49115 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
Tue Mar 8, 1960
Suit Number: SC 125/1959
CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
MBANEFO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
BRETT, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
APPELLANTS
K CHELLARAM & SONS (NIGERIA)
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
INFRINGEMENT OF DESIGNS -DAMAGES-INNOCENT INFRINGER
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent, who had an office in London where the appellant’s design was registered, infringed on the appellant’s design forcing the appellant sell his products at reduced prices and eventually folding up.
HELD
The court held that the respondent did not prove it had no means of knowing of the design and that the appellant was entitled to damages for loss of profit.
ISSUES
1 Whether the lower court was right when it held that the defence of innocent infringer did not avail the respondent
2 whether the learned Judge has preceded on an erroneous principle in his assessment of damages.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
INFRINGEMENT OF DESIGNS- INNOCENT INFRINGER
‘for the defendants to claim the protection afforded by either the English Act or the local Ordinance(the defence of innocent infringer), they must satisfy the Court that they had no reasonable means of finding out whether or not the design had been registered.’ Per Ademola C.F.J
QUANTUM OF DAMAGES
‘the measure of damage is the loss which the plaintiffs have actually sustained as the natural and direct consequence of the defendants.’ Per Per Ademola C.F.J
CASES CITED
1. Leeds Forge Company Ltd. v. Deighton’s Patent Flue Company, 25 R.P.C. 209, at p.212
2. Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd. v. The Puncture Proof Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd. 15R.P.C. 405
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. The United Kingdom Designs (Protection) Ordinance, Cap.221
2. The Registered Design Act 1949
