The appellants, as the proprietor of a registered design and the local exclusive licensee, sought relief against the respondents on the ground that they were infringing their design registration. The court a quo dismissed the application with costs on the ground that the design had not been validly registered because it was not new or original. It also held that the design, in any event, had not been infringed. The present appeal was noted. The differences between the parties' designs were insubstantial, and the appeal was accordingly upheld