Industrial Designs Detail

Industrial Designs

Kenrub Limited v Metro-Poly Kenya Limited (IPT Case 98 of 2021) [2022] KEIPT 863 (KLR) (31 August 2022) (Judgment)

Parties
Kenrub Limited v Metro-Poly Kenya Limited
Court
Industrial Property Tribunal of Kenya (Nairobi)
Bench
B.M. Kairaria (Chair), Pauline Muhanda, Frasia Wangari
Tags
Design infringement Burden of proof
Date
2026-08-26

Facts

Kenrub owned registered Industrial Design No. 1090 (registered 12 October 2018) for a solid non-inflatable rubber wheel. In January 2021, Kenrub discovered Metro-Poly manufacturing and selling a similar wheel and sued for infringement; Metro-Poly claimed independent design by its own managing director.

Issues

Whether Metro-Poly's wheel infringed Design No. 1090, and what evidence suffices to prove design infringement.

Rule

Industrial Property Act 2001, ss.84, 86, 87, 92, 103, 106, 107, 108; Industrial Property Tribunal Rules 2002, Part IV, r.20; the visual-comparison test applied in Procter & Gamble Co v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 936.

Analysis

Infringement is assessed by visual comparison of the registered design as filed against the accused product. The Tribunal held Kenrub's evidence, a photocopied certificate and unclear pictorial representations, was inadequate to permit a proper comparison; a claimant bears the burden of producing clear images of the design as registered, not just of its own manufactured goods.

Conclusion

Claim dismissed with costs to Metro-Poly for failure to prove infringement.

Judgement available at kenyalaw.org.

Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

The IP Case Law Database is a repository of case briefs summarising rulings and judgments related to intellectual property law in Kenya. It covers various types of IP, including copyrights, trademarks, patents, and more.

The database is open to legal practitioners, researchers, scholars, and students interested in the field of intellectual property law in Kenya. It is designed to be a useful tool for anyone seeking to understand the legal precedents that shape IP law in the country.

The database features cases across all areas of intellectual property law, including copyright infringement, trademark disputes, patent issues, and cases involving industrial designs and utility models. It also includes cases related to collective management organisations and royalty collection.

We aim to update the database regularly to ensure that it contains the latest rulings and judgments. New cases are added as soon as they are available to keep our users informed about the latest developments in IP law.

Yes, the database is fully searchable. You can search by case name, type of intellectual property, legal issue, or court decision. This allows you to quickly find relevant case briefs based on your research needs.

Each case brief includes key details such as the facts of the case, the legal issues at hand, the court’s ruling, and a summary of the legal analysis. This structure helps users quickly understand the critical points of each ruling.

In addition to the case briefs, we provide links to full-text judgments where available. This ensures that users can access the complete legal reasoning and details if they need more in-depth information.

To cite cases from our database, you should follow standard legal citation practices. Each case brief includes the official case reference, making it easy to include in your legal documents or research papers.

At this time, the database is curated by legal experts and researchers. However, we welcome suggestions for cases to include or features to improve the platform. Please contact us through our support page if you have feedback or suggestions.