Author

Kherk Ying Chew

Browsing
Kherk Ying Chew heads the Intellectual Property and Dispute Resolution Practice Groups of Wong & Partners. She has decades of experience in IP, commercial litigation, corporate compliance, information technology and Internet regulatory issues. Ms. Chew has been named among the Commended External Counsels of the Year 2017 by the In-House Community. She is also one of two Malaysians ranked in Top 250 Women in IP 2017 by Managing IP. She is ranked in the first tier of IP practitioners in Malaysia by Chambers Asia and Asia Pacific Legal 500. According to Chambers Asia Pacific, Ms. Chew is "an acclaimed figure in the sector, drawing praise as a lawyer who is 'really commercial, very practical' and 'knows her subject impressively well'". Asia Pacific Legal 500 had previously commented that she is "highly respected for contentious and non-contentious work" and has won "an important precedent-setting case for Malaysian software copyright law.” Ms. Chew is highly regarded for IP litigation, and has been recognised as a Market-leading Lawyer for Dispute Resolution & Litigation, Intellectual Property by Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2017. She is also listed as a recommended expert for trademark enforcement and litigation, trademark prosecution and strategy by World Trademark Review 1000, 2017; while IAM Patent 1000, 2017 has listed her as a recommended expert for patent prosecution and a highly recommended expert for patent litigation and transactions. Ms. Chew is a registered trade mark, patent and design agent in Malaysia and the principal author of the CCH published Intellectual Property Laws of Malaysia. She is among the few selected trainers for an IP valuation course by Intellectual Property Corp of Malaysia (MyIPO) and is an accredited IP valuer by the World Trade Institute.

Introduction In a recent decision, Heineken Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v Super La Via Sdn Bhd [1](Heineken) the Malaysian High Court held that a party accused of trademark infringement could not rely on being a mere middleman just facilitating the importation of counterfeit goods to be sold by another party to a non-Malaysian market to avoid liability. The assertion of non-ownership of the said goods is not a statutory defence under the Malaysian Trade Marks…

Introduction The law has always recognized the laissez-faire principle of the freedom of contract and as such, Malaysian Courts have been willing to uphold exclusion clauses when such clauses are clearly drafted. In the recent landmark decision of CIMB Bank Bhd v Anthony Lawrence Bourke & Anor [2019] 2 MLJ 1, the Malaysian Federal Court held that where such exclusion clauses are drafted in a manner which effectively limits a party from enforcing their rights…

On November 21, 2018, the Malaysian Federal Court overturned a well-established decision on the effectiveness and enforceability of liquidated damages clauses in contracts.[1] Before this decision, the previous position had left many questioning the effectiveness of incorporating a liquidated damages clauses in their contracts. BACKGROUND The fundamental purpose of a liquidated damages clause is to enable the parties to negotiate and agree in their contract on the compensation payable for non-performance of contractual obligations. Section…