In brief
The dispute concerned Babas Nadi (M) Sdn Bhd's ("Claimant") product packaging for turmeric and chili powder, which had been used in Singapore since 2006 and registered as a trademark since 2019.
Glory Trading & Minimart Pte Ltd ("Respondent") had imported and sold its own "EVA" brand spices in packaging that the Claimant alleged was confusingly similar to its own, leading to the Claimant filing trademark and copyright infringement claims in early 2024.
The parties agreed to submit their disputes for mediation under the WIPO-ASEAN Mediation Programme (AMP+), which took place on 31 October 2025.
The WIPO-ASEAN Mediation Programme (AMP+) allows parties to receive reimbursement of up to SGD 5,000 (approximately USD 3,750) per mediation case. Where a Singapore-based mediator is appointed, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) makes additional funding of up to SGD 2,000 (approximately USD 1,500) available, so that the maximum funding is up to SGD 7,000 (approximately USD 5,250).
In more detail
The Claimant's and Respondent's product packaging are reproduced below:
Claimant's chili and turmeric powder packaging:
 |
|
Respondent's chili and turmeric powder packaging:
 |
|
Tensions between the parties escalated following a cease and desist letter from the Claimant. The Respondent subsequently destroyed the allegedly infringing products and introduced new packaging, but this was not effectively communicated to the Claimant's Malaysian management.
During the mediation, the Claimant's counsel sought acknowledgment of its intellectual property (IP) rights violation, agreement to stop the use of infringing marks and compensation for the alleged infringement. The Respondent explained that it had already stopped using the allegedly infringing marks but did not communicate this properly to the Claimant.
During the mediation, rigorous reality testing helped both parties move beyond their fixed viewpoints and consider outcomes grounded in risk management and mutual benefit.
A settlement agreement was eventually reached as both parties sought commercial solutions and benefited from the mediator's facilitation of their discussions, among others.
The mediation eventually enabled them to reach an agreement on key commercial terms, including a mutually acceptable monetary settlement.
Key takeaways
This case highlights the potential efficacy of mediation as a mode of alternative dispute resolution, particularly in managing an unrepresented party. Early resolution of a dispute often leads to significant time and resource savings. If at least one party to a dispute is an ASEAN entity, consider filing for AMP+ funding. The WIPO SGD 5,000 baseline subsidy (plus the IPOS SGD 2,000 top‑up if a Singapore‑based mediator is appointed) materially reduces cost risk. Applications are available until 31 December 2026 or until funds are exhausted.
Even without a live infringement claim, AMP+ funding covers facilitated negotiations to bridge gaps on license scope, pricing, co‑branding or tech transfer terms. This can lead to amicable resolution before a dispute evolves and positions become further entrenched.
This case also emphasizes the importance of clear and timely communication in cross-border disputes, as well as proactive IP portfolio management to reduce dispute risk. Mediation can also preserve commercial relationships and create commercial outcomes, e.g., coexistence terms, product differentiation and distribution adjustments, which are not available through litigation.
Our team regularly deploys mediation as a frontline tool in IP disputes. For Singapore‑linked or ASEAN cross‑border matters, we support clients in assessing AMP+ eligibility, kickstarting the mediation process, representing our clients during mediation, preparing targeted case statements and documents, assisting in drafting settlement agreements, as well as any enforcement support required.
If you are facing an IP dispute or a stalled negotiation that needs a structured push, feel free to reach out to explore the possibility of mediation to save time and costs.
* * * * *
The following authors have contributed to this legal update:
© 2026 Baker & McKenzie. Wong & Leow. All rights reserved. Baker & McKenzie. Wong & Leow is incorporated with limited liability and is a member firm of Baker & McKenzie International, a global law firm with member law firms around the world. In accordance with the common terminology used in professional service organizations, reference to a "principal" means a person who is a partner, or equivalent, in such a law firm. Similarly, reference to an "office" means an office of any such law firm. This may qualify as "Attorney Advertising" requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.