Topic
Bombay High Court rules that prior adoption and territorial use in India, along with acquiescence, override registered trademark rights at the interim stage. The judgment underscores that passing off actions require proof of goodwill, limiting challenges to trademark validity during interlocutory proceedings.
The Bombay High Court granted a permanent injunction against Zenlabs India for using 'ZENOX' on pharmaceuticals, finding it deceptively similar to Glenmark's registered mark 'ZINOX'. The ruling reinforces that minor spelling variations in drug trademarks can constitute passing off when consumer confusion is likely, setting a clear precedent for brand protection in the pharma sector.
The Madras High Court dismissed a trademark infringement suit after the defendant removed a defamatory YouTube video and filed a binding undertaking not to republish similar content. This establishes a new pathway for resolving online IP disputes without protracted litigation, benefiting brands facing digital defamation and intermediaries seeking to avoid liability.
The Bombay High Court ruled that 'ABSUN PHARMA' is deceptively similar to 'SUN PHARMA', constituting trademark infringement and passing off under Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act and common law. Exporting goods to Africa does not exempt the defendant from liability in India, reinforcing that consumer confusion in the domestic market is the decisive factor.
Bombay High Court vacates an ex parte injunction after finding the plaintiff suppressed the defendant's prior use of the 'Apex' trademark since 1966. The ruling underscores the duty of full disclosure in IP injunction applications and reinforces the prior use defense under the Trademarks Act.