ICT Policy Africa

security, cryptography and electronic certification activities; protect basic human rights, in particular the right to human dignity, honour and respect of privacy, as well as the

peoples' rights should necessarily guarantee human rights; http://confinder.richmond.edu/Cameroon.htm (50 of 71)4/12/2005 10:53:07 AM Cameroon considering that the enjoyment of rights and

public data must be a minimum of a level 2 Data Centre. Rights of Way/Way Leaves: Rights of way, way leaves, permits and clearances have been a persistent

by the respondent and so that registration was an infringement on the applicant’s right to use the trademark in Uganda. He further deposed that the applicant had never

Respondent to have locus standi, the Respondent's right must have been breached by the Applicant or the right it enjoys through the authority of a third

trademark infringement plaintiff must show a valid, protectable trademark in which he has rights prior to those of the defendant. The plaintiff herein has through the evidence of

trademark infringement plaintiff must show a valid, protectable trademark in which he has rights prior to those of the defendant. The plaintiff herein has through the evidence of

the person with the exclusive right to use the trademark in relation to the goods in or respect of which it is registered. Such right in the trademark deemed to

affect the rights of action against any person for passing off goods as the goods of another person or the remedies in respect of those rights of action

mark owner who successfully shows 5 likelihood of confusion, has in my opinion, a right of action in damages or for an account, and for an injunction to restrain the

submitted on the Appellant‘s entitlement to register the word 'Java 'in its own right and as a descriptive word. The Appellants Counsel submitted that the Assistant Registrar

to support a cause of action, namely that; 1. the plaintiff enjoyed a right, 2. the right has been violated, 3. the defendant is liable. It was submitted that to

in Southern Sudan hold the trademark and the exclusive Supermatch commercial territorial rights for both Uganda and Southern Sudan. It is the case of the applicant that certain

their own trademark rules regarding the scope of rights, applicable legal norms, conditions and enforcement of rights (see article 6 of the Paris Convention). Concerning

Is it the proprietary right assigned to the applicant conferred by the registered trademark? Can be asserted that such proprietary right to a trademark is

action.‖ The right of action by a plain reading of the section is the right of action of a rights owner of a trademark suing another person for passing off

Court was urged to look at S.36 of the Trade Mark Act that grants exclusive rights for use where the Trade Mark is registered. Counsel argued that since the Applicant’s

the 1st plaintiff. However, they are ineffective on account of being unregistered. A right in a trademark is conferred on registration in the Register of Trademarks of a

goodwill has a property right that can be protected by an action in passing off. Buckley LJ described the nature of the proprietary right in the case of HP Bulmer

Properties Act, 1982 applied to the suit land, that declaration conferred proprietary rights to the applicants. In his view, therefore, Platt, J.S.C., erred to hold that title

Whether or not the launch of Google SMS trader was a breach of the plaintiff’s rights? 3. What remedies are available to the parties? Issue No. 1: Whether or not

controlled by the Society. The rights assigned to the Society by this Deed are:(i) all their performing rights, and (ii) all film synchronization rights (subject to the undertaking

assignment the Applicant is said to have assumed the executive rights to control the distribution of the music rights, public performance for payment and broadcasting of the whole

pleaded are true” . And “if the plaint shows that a Plaintiff enjoyed a right, the right has been violated and the Defendant is liable, then a cause of action

various artistic works and owner of the copy rights there in if any. 2. Whether the defendants infringed the plaintiffs copy right. 3. Whether the plaintiff is liable under

a right; that the right has been violated; and finally that the Defendant is liable. The Plaintiff's rights are established under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act

enjoyed a right, that the right has been violated and that the defendant is liable; Auto Garage vs Motokov (No.3) [1971] E.A 514. Needless to mention, a right is a

infringe the Plaintiffs moral rights under section 10 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act. Moral rights include a right to claim authorship of the

73, 77(c) and (e) of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2006, the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Regulations SI 1/2010; Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act

first denying liability, claimed that they had not infringed the intellectual property rights of the Plaintiff because they obtained them lawfully. It was the Defendant’s contention