Two giants in the tea trade have locked horns and are battling it out in a Sri Lankan court to get a settlement on some issues coming under the Intellectual Property Act.In a case taken up for hearing a few weeks ago, Harry Jayawardena of Stassen Exports (Pvt) Ltd and Stassen International (Pvt) Ltd complained [...]

The Sunday Times Sri Lanka

Giants in the tea trade lock horns in court

View(s):

Two giants in the tea trade have locked horns and are battling it out in a Sri Lankan court to get a settlement on some issues coming under the Intellectual Property Act.In a case taken up for hearing a few weeks ago, Harry Jayawardena of Stassen Exports (Pvt) Ltd and Stassen International (Pvt) Ltd complained that the parties named as accused in the plaint have stolen information that the complainant claims exclusivity over.However when the case came up before Chandima Liyanage, Colombo Magistrate, Mr. Jayawardena was ordered to pay compensation in a sum of Rs 50,000 to Zaki Alif, the party named as the first accused.

If the complainant failed to pay the said amount as compensation, the Magistrate ordered complainant to be jailed for six months.
The Magistrate acquitted Mr. Alif on the basis that there is no evidence to show that he is involved in a company called OSH Holdings (in which another case is pending in the Colombo Commercial High Court against Stassens and Mr. Jayawardena) and said the complainant had failed to disclose vital information in the case, pertaining to the other case filed by Mr Jayawardena in the Colombo Commercial High Court. Thus the Magistrate said he didn’t see any reason why the party named as first accused should be a party in this case.The other parties named as accused in this case are OSH Holdings, S. Sithamparanathan and M. Thogesan.

Jeewantha Jayatilleke, senior counsel appearing for the 2nd and 3rd accused, submitted to Court that the complainant has filed a case in the Commercial High Court claiming exclusive rights to a particular tea blend and that he should be given an enjoining order preventing the parties named as the accused from using that tea blend.But, counsel argued that this vital information was not disclosed in court by the complainant.
He said the complainant has in the Magistrate’s Court sought and secured an ex-parte search warrant to search the stores of OSH Holdings and to issue summons to the parties named as accused.Mr. Jayatilleke submitted that the fact remains that the Commercial High Court does not recognise the right of the complainant on such exclusivity of the tea blend to the complainant company and the High Court has refused to issue an interim injunction.

Under these circumstances, he submitted to court that since the High Court has already decided on the matter, there is no right available to the complainant and also there is no jurisdiction for a lower court on a decision made by a higher court.These facts, the counsel said, were not disclosed when the complainant got summons and a search warrant.As a result, he said that the Magistrate was misdirected to issue an order to issue summons and a search warrant as the Magistrate was never informed of these material facts whereas there is a legal duty to disclose this information to the Magistrate.Dulinda Weerasooriya PC, appearing for the complainant Harry Jayawardena, contended that the High Court order has no relevance in this case. The Magistrate can go into this matter as the High Court is dealing with the original civil jurisdiction.
Dharmatilleke Gamage with Arun Mallawarachchi appeared for the party named as the first accused. Dulinda Weerasooriya, PC with U.L.G. Bandarage appeared for the complainant while Jeewantha Jayatilleke with Ralitha Amarasena and Ms Mary Dickman appeared for 2nd and 3rd accused.

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.