CASE: CHING KIAN CHUAN vs.

CA AUTHOR: Bonifacio
[G.R. No. 130360] 363 SCRA 145 (2001) NOTES:
TOPIC: Elements of Copyrightable Subject Matter
PONENTE: Quisumbing, J.
FACTS:
 Wilson Ong Ching Chuan (Ong) imports vermicelli from China National Cereals Oils and Foodstuff
Imports and Export Corporation based in Beijing China (Ceroilfood).
 He repacks it in cellophane wrappers with a design of two-dragons and the TOWER trademark on the
uppermost portion.
 He later acquired a Certificate of Copyright Registration from the National Library on June 9, 1993 on
the same design.
 Ong discovered that Lorenzo Tan repacks his vermicelli, imported from the same company but from the
Qingdao branch, in a nearly identical wrapper.
 Ong filed, with the RTC of Quezon City, against Tan a verified complaint for infringement of copyright
with damages and prayer for temporary restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction.
 RTC: issued a temporary restraining order.
 Tan filed an opposition to Ong’s application alleging that Ong was not entitled to an injunction.
 According to Tan, (1) Ong did not have a clear right over the use of the trademark Pagoda and
Lungkow vermicelli as these were registered in the name of Ceroilfood Shandong (Ceroilfood Qingdao
branch). (2) Tan was the exclusive distributor in the Philippines of the vermicelli and was solely
authorized to use said trademark. (3) Ong merely copied the two-dragon design from Ceroilfood
Shandong which had the Certificates of Registration issued by different countries. (4) Ong’s Certificate
of Copyright Registration was not valid for lack of originality.
 Ong countered Tans opposition.
 RTC: issued the writ in Ong’s favor upon his filing of a bond.
 Tan filed a motion to dissolve the writ of preliminary injunction. The RTC denied it. Tan’s motion for
reconsideration was also denied.
 Tan file a special civil action for certiorari with Court of Appeals.
 CA: set aside the RTC order
 Ong filed a motion for reconsideration.
 CA: set aside RTC decision and issue a permanent injunction enjoining the enforcement/implementation
of the writ issued by the RTC in favor of Ong.
 Ong filed a petition for review with the SC.
ISSUE(S):
1. Whether Ong was entitled to a writ of preliminary injunction to prohibit Tan from using the cellophane
wrapper with the two-dragon device.
HELD:
1. No.
RATIO
1. A person to be entitled to a copyright must be the original owner. The grant of preliminary
injunction depends chiefly on the extent of doubt on the validity of the copyright, existence of
infringement, and the damages sustained by such infringement. In this case, the copies of the
certificates of copyright registered in the name of Ceroilfood Shandong sufficiently raise
reasonable doubt. Ong’s right has yet to be clearly and unmistakably demonstrated. Thus, in the
absence of proof of a legal right and the injury sustained by the Ong, the order of the RTC granting
the issuance of an injunctive writ will be set aside for having been issued with grave abuse of
discretion.
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:
1. A person to be entitled to a copyright must be the original owner.
2. To be entitled to an injunctive writ, the petitioner must show the existence of a clear and
unmistakable right and an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage.
DISSENTING/CONCURRING OPINION(S):