DCC 98/1996

The original dispute involved the infringement of a trademark which had been registered in the UAE trademark register. An attachment order was granted. It was then argued this could not be done as it would require the claimant to become a creditor of the defendant. The court confirmed this was not the case as this case had fallen under the trademark law so did not need to satisfy civil procedure law requirements.

Background

A claim was brought against a local company and a factory seeking an attachment against the defendants' products and label. The claimants manufactured and sold 'Clorox' and argued the defendants' product 'Clorix' was infringing their trademark. A Court of first instance judge granted an order for attachment against the products and label being sold by the defendants. The defendants objected and the Court of first instance cancelled the attachment order as the Civil Procedure Law required that a condition for granting an attachment order was that the claimant became a creditor to the defendants. This condition was not satisfied. The claimant appealed and the appeal court upheld the decision. The claimant appealed by cassation arguing the lower court had failed to apply the Trademark Law.

Decision