Delhi High Court
Use of a trademark as keyword in Google’s Ad Programme amounts to Use and Constitutes Infringement - Delhi High Court
The Appellants, Google India (P) Ltd., is a non-exclusive reseller of the Google Ads Programme in India, whereas the Respondents were DRS Logistics (P) Ltd., and Agarwal Packers and Movers (P) Ltd., who are leading packaging, moving and logistics service providers in the country. This case, Google…
Interpretation of Section 16(1) of the Indian Patents Act in Syngenta Limited vs. Controller of Patents and Designs
The legal case of Syngenta Limited vs. Controller Of Patents And Designs revolves around the interpretation of Section 16(1) of the Indian Patents Act. This section pertains to the power of the Controller to make orders regarding the division of patent applications, specifically focusing on…
A judicial lens on controversial IP realities in India
In a recent order passed on August 3, 2023, the Delhi HC in Ravi Manchanda v. Registrar of Trademarks rather scathingly pointed out a glaring error in an order passed by the Senior Examiner of Trademarks. In a case that was described as ‘sui-generis’, the Hon’ble Judge drew attention to a critical…
Trademark Infringement and Unfair Trade Practices: The Calvin Klein Case
In this article, we delve into the intricacies of the Calvin Klein case, ( COTY GERMANY GMBH Vs XERYUS RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ) exploring the Court's findings, and the implications of such actions on brand reputation and consumer trust. The plaintiff's trademark "Calvin Klein" was…
Restoring Patent Applications: Indian Courts' Stance on missing of deadlines to request examination or respond to examination reports
As patent attorneys, adhering to deadlines is pivotal for the success of a patent application. In India, two critical deadlines to bear in mind while prosecuting patent applications are those for filing a request for examination and responding to the first examination report. Presently, while a…
Delhi High Court declares Cult Streetwear Brand 'Supreme' red-box device mark as a Well-Known Trademark in India
Charter 4 Corp, the plaintiff, claimed to have adopted the 'Supreme' mark back in 1994 in the United States and had been using it in India since 2006, gaining popularity among Indian customers. The company boasted over 700 global registrations for the mark 'Supreme', and they had also filed…
Affidavit Not Mandatory for Granting Well-Known Status to Trademarks in India
Kamdhenu Limited filed an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Trademarks, who had dismissed their application to have their trademark 'KAMDHENU' included in the "List of Well-Known Trademarks." The Registrar's rejection was the absence of an affidavit along with the supporting evidence to…
Adobe wins permanent injunction and significant damages against cyber squatter
The Delhi High Court’s ruling in the case of Adobe Inc. v. Namase Patel and Ors. serves as a reminder of the importance of protecting trademarks and intellectual property rights on the internet. In this case, the court granted a permanent injunction in favour of the Plaintiff. The Court recognised…
Delhi High Court decides on the appropriate jurisdiction (HC) for appeals against the orders of the Patent Office
The Delhi High Court in the matters of Dr. Reddys Laboratories Limited & Anr. Vs. The Controller of Patents & Ors. C.O. (CONN.IPD-PAT) No. 3/2021 with Thyssenkrupp Rothe Erde Germany GMBH Vs. The Controller of Patents & Anr. C.O. (CONN.IPD-PAT) 1/2022 and Elta Systems Ltd. Vs. The…
Delhi High Court creates Intellectual Property Division
As you may recall, the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 was promulgated by the President of India and notified on April 4, 2021. It amended several acts relating to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), effectively abolished various Boards/Tribunals…