TOWA Corp v ASMPT: Patent Infringement Damages Assessment Appeal

TOWA Corporation and ASMPT Singapore Pte Ltd cross-appealed against the decision of the Judge in relation to the assessment of damages for patent infringement in the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore on 21 November 2024 and 22 November 2024. TOWA sued ASMPT for infringing on TOWA’s Singapore Patent No 49740 relating to TOWA’s “YPS” auto mould machines. The court allowed ASMPT's appeal in part, finding that the Judge erred by failing to account for certain costs under the category of “general additional costs of sales”, and dismissed TOWA's appeal in its entirety.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part.

1.3 Case Type

Intellectual Property

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Cross-appeals regarding the assessment of damages for patent infringement. The court allowed ASMPT's appeal in part and dismissed TOWA's appeal.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
TOWA CorporationAppellant, Claimant, RespondentCorporationAppeal dismissed in its entiretyLost
ASMPT Singapore Pte LtdRespondent, Defendant, AppellantCorporationAppeal allowed in partPartial
ASMPT LimitedDefendantCorporation

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tay Yong KwangJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Andrew Phang Boon LeongSenior JudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Low Chai ChongDentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Long Ai MingDentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Foo Maw JiunDentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Ng Ah Sock AngieDentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Chia Jung Yeong MarkDentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Lim Ying Sin DanielJoyce A. Tan & Partners LLC
Lakshmanan s/o AnbarazanJoyce A. Tan & Partners LLC

4. Facts

  1. TOWA sued ASMPT for infringing on TOWA’s Singapore Patent No 49740.
  2. The Patent relates to TOWA’s “YPS” auto mould machines.
  3. ASMPT was found to have breached the Patent through its “IDEALmold” machine.
  4. TOWA elected to claim damages on 8 August 2018.
  5. The damages were calculated based on the profits TOWA could have made from its YPS machines in a hypothetical but-for scenario.
  6. ASMPT appealed that the Judge had erred by failing to account for certain costs under the category of “general additional costs of sales”.
  7. TOWA’s expert alleged that he had not included the Contested Unclassified Costs in his previous report because the portion of those costs attributable to the YPS machines was “inconclusive”.

5. Formal Citations

  1. TOWA Corp v ASMPT Singapore Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 25 of 2024, [2024] SGCA 52
  2. TOWA Corp v ASMPT Singapore Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 26 of 2024, [2024] SGCA 52
  3. Towa Corp v ASM Technology Singapore Pte Ltd, , [2023] 5 SLR 870
  4. TOWA Corp v ASMPT Singapore Pte Ltd, , [2024] SGHC 163

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Writ date
TOWA elected to claim damages
ASMPT submitted its offer to settle
Judge formally recorded down the judgment sum
Court of Appeal hearing date
Grounds of decision delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Assessment of Damages for Patent Infringement
    • Outcome: The court held that the Judge erred by not proportionally attributing the Contested Unclassified Costs to the YPS machines.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Calculation of lost profits
      • Accounting for general additional costs of sales
      • Proportional allocation of unclassified costs
    • Related Cases:
      • [2023] 5 SLR 870
  2. Pre-judgment Interest
    • Outcome: The court upheld the Judge's orders on the pre-judgment interest payable to TOWA, finding that the matters of whether to award pre-judgment interest, and if so, how much to award, lie within the discretion of the first-instance court.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2017] 5 SLR 175
      • [2016] 3 SLR 1308

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Patent Infringement

10. Practice Areas

  • Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Patent Infringement
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Manufacturing

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Towa Corp v ASM Technology Singapore Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2023] 5 SLR 870SingaporeCited as the AD Judgment, the decision of the judge below regarding the assessment of damages.
Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas BankCourt of AppealYes[2017] 5 SLR 175SingaporeCited regarding pre-judgment interest, but the court held that it should not be taken to fetter the discretion of the first-instance court.
Grains and Industrial Products Trading Pte Ltd v Bank of India and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2016] 3 SLR 1308SingaporeCited for the purpose of pre-judgment interest is to compensate a successful claimant for the time value of money.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 22A r 5(2) of the Rules of Court 2014

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Patent
  • Patent Infringement
  • Damages Assessment
  • YPS Machines
  • IDEALmold Machine
  • General Additional Costs of Sales
  • Contested Unclassified Costs
  • Pre-judgment Interest
  • Election of Remedy
  • Offer to Settle

15.2 Keywords

  • patent infringement
  • damages
  • assessment
  • TOWA
  • ASMPT
  • Singapore
  • intellectual property

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Damages Assessment95
Patents75
Breach of Contract60
Commercial Disputes55
Litigation50
Misrepresentation40

16. Subjects

  • Intellectual Property Law
  • Patent Law
  • Civil Litigation
  • Damages