Nike International Ltd

Nike International Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 6 counsels. Through 2 law firms. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

Nike International Ltd has been represented by 2 law firms and 6 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Harry Elias Partnership LLP	1 case	Toh Wei Yi Michael Palmer
Harry Elias Partnership	1 case	Toh Wei Yi Michael Palmer Christopher Woo Harry Elias Zee Yeng Yun Clarence Lee

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Nike International Ltd's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.3
Complex Cases: 0 (0.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.5 parties avg	2.5	50.0%
Won	22.0 parties avg	2.0	50.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Nike International Ltd's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(50.0%)	50.0%
Won	2(50.0%)	50.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2011	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2011-sgca-6 27 Feb 2011	27 Feb 2011	Respondent	LostNike International's application for registration was rejected.
2	2010-sghc-140 04 May 2010	04 May 2010	Respondent	WonNike's application to register the trademark was allowed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	2006-sgca-2 15 Jan 2006	15 Jan 2006	Appellant	WonThe appeal was allowed, and the decision of the Principal Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks to revoke the trade mark was restored.
4	2005-sghc-139 04 Aug 2005	04 Aug 2005	Appellant, Applicant	LostAppeal against the dismissal of its opposition based on res judicata was dismissed. Application to revoke Campomar's mark was not granted.