About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Finance Intangible Assets Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

TT025-j

Back

[2003] UKPC 85 (Privy Council Appeal No. 49 of 2002)

This case stems from a patent case where the Respondent was successful. While the present case does not focus on the substantive question of patents, it renders the judgment in the first case as unenforceable. The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by IMH Investments (the Respondent) that permitted the execution of their judgment against Trinidad Home Developers Limited (in voluntary liquidation) (the Appellant). The Appellant appealed to the Privy Council. This final appeal focused on whether the entry and registration of a judgment, obtained in favor of the Respondent following a patent dispute, can be deemed an execution in enforcing charges under the Remedies of Creditors Act. A key question was whether execution of the judgment was completed before the commencement of winding up of the Appellant’s company, and if not, whether the judgment creditor (the Respondent) would lose priority over other creditors. The Respondent registered its judgment for execution under the Remedies of Creditors Act, Chap. 8:09 (The Act). Following the voluntary liquidation of the Appellant’s company, the Respondent submitted an application to the liquidator for payment. The liquidator, however, stated that less than $3 million (Trinidad and Tobago currency) remained after payment of secured and preferential creditors. Further, the liquidator contended that the judgment secured by the Respondent was not properly registered, as the specified debt in the writ was in United States (US) dollars, while the order (at the time of registration) was for payment in Trinidad and Tobago dollars. The question on the currency was resolved by relying on Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd [1976] AC 443, where it was decided that the US dollars noted were simply a unit to account for the monies owed. In relying on the case of Bristol Airport plc v Powdrill [1990] 1 Ch 744, the Privy Council concluded that entry and registration of a judgment not only created the security over the land that the Respondent sought to have a charge against, but also counted as part of the process of execution. The judgment, however, was unenforceable, as Section 254 of the Act requires there to be completion of the execution of a judgment against a company prior to that company winding up. This was not done in the case of the Appellant; thus, the judgment won in the patent case became unenforceable.

Cases referred to (non-exhaustive):

Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd [1976] AC 443

Trinidad Home Developers Ltd v IMH Investment Ltd (No 2)

In re Boyle, a Bankrupt (1853) 3 De G M & G 515

Bristol Airport plc v Powdrill [1990] 1 Ch 744