Polygram Records Sdn Bhd and Others v Phua Tai Eng

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Gibson
• Judgment Date: 06 December 1985
• Neutral Citation: [1985] SGHC 37
• Docket Number: Suit No 2605 of 1984
• Date: 06 December 1985
• Year: 1985
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Plaintiff Counsel: Pauline Teresa O'Connor (Drew & Napier)
• Citation: [1985] SGHC 37
• Defendant Counsel: Vinogopal Ramayah (Wee Ramayah & Partners)
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Subject Matter: Civil contempt,Failure to comply with order,Contempt of Court,Injunction,Pirated copies of sound tapes,Standard of proof required to commit for contempt

This is an application by the plaintiffs for an order of committal against the defendant for contempt of court for failing to comply with the order dated 26 April 1984 (the order). The terms of the order, insofar as relevant to the present proceedings, are as follows:

1 The Defendant, PHUA TAI ENG, TRADING AS PHUA TV SERVICE (whether by himself or by his servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever) be restrained, and an Injunction be granted restraining them until after the hearing of a Notice of Motion returnable on 11 May 1984. From doing or authorising the doing of the following acts or any of them, that is to say:

(a) making, manufacturing, reproducing, selling, distributing, importing for sale, offering for sale, or otherwise parting with possession power custody or control of or destroying or defacing or hiding or removing any of the following, namely,

(i) any copies or any substantial copies (whether in the form of cassette tapes or otherwise) of any gramophone record and/or sound tape including any of the gramophone records and/or sound tapes listed in Sch A hereto attached in which copyright subsists in Singapore and is vested in the Plaintiffs or any one of them not being a copy made by or on behalf of or with the consent of the Plaintiffs or any one of them (hereinafter called the `Pirated copy or copies`);

6 The Defendant do within three days place into the custody of the Plaintiffs` Solicitors or to their order all pirated copies as herein defined which may come into their possession after service of this Order upon them.

By an order made on 11 January 1985 the interim injunction contained in para (1) of the order was continued until the trial of the action or until further order.

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant had committed breaches of the terms of the order. The breaches complained of are the following:

(a) On 6 June 1984, the defendant offered for sale, inter alia, 100 cassettes of sound tape (brief particulars of which appear in exh GJC 4) each of which is said to contain a song listed in Sch A (attached to the order). These cassettes together with others were seized by the police at a raid at the defendant`s premises conducted on that day pursuant to a search warrant.

(b) On 12 November 1984, the defendant again offered for sale, inter alia, 11 cassettes of sound tape (brief particulars of which appear in exh GJC 7) each of which is said to contain a song listed in Sch...