Search
Searching Content indexed under Sovereign Immunity: Public Sector Government by LexOrbis ordered by Published Date Descending.
Links to Result pages
 
1  
 
Title
Country
Organisation
Author
Date
1
Corporate Name Similar To Trademark Co-Exist
Sometime it happens in trademark disputes that the impugned mark is an indicator of a trade source which is entirely different from the first i.e. the businesses and the goods are completely different bearing the same trade name/mark.
India
21 Sep 2007
2
Acquiescence: A Facet Of Delay
A word trademark is inherently distinctive when it is an invented or coined word and the uniqueness of its distinctiveness can be diluted if used by others in an unauthorized manner. But the pertinent question here is that what is the time limitation to bring a passing off action against the unauthorized use of the trademark.
India
11 Jan 2007
3
"Interested Person" Under The Copyright Act, 1957
One of the important criteria for obtaining registration under the Copyright Act, 1957 is that, the application must include a statement accompanied by a certificate from the registrar to the effect that no trademark identical or deceptively similar to such artistic work has been registered under the Trademark Act.
India
18 Dec 2006
4
Power Of Registrar To Accept Rectification Application During The Pendency Of Suit
Sec. 57 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 gives power to registrar to rectify the register. However, the plain reading of this section gives rise to a conflicting situation in light of section 107 of the Act, which puts a bar on power of registrar in this regard.
India
14 Dec 2006
5
Regional Players as Bonafide Users??
The Trademark battle often runs into taking the shape of a suit for infringement, deception, claim of being a prior user, so on and so forth.
India
 
13 Jul 2006
6
"TIGER HILL"; Beer Free of Charges of Deception
Asia Pacific Breweries Ltd, an incorporation in Singapore manufactures beer under the trademark ‘TIGER Beer’. Asia Pacific Breweries claims to be the owner and user of the mark since 1932. The company owns 14 Breweries in eight countries round the world.
India
14 Jun 2006
7
Suit for Different Cause of Action: How Far Maintainable?
It is a trite law that a judgement and order passed by the court having no territorial jurisdiction would be a nullity. The provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, govern determination of territorial jurisdiction of a Civil Court. Section 20 of the Code provides that the suits which do not come within the purview of Section 16 to 19 of the Code are to be instituted where the defendants reside or cause of action arises.
India
18 May 2006
8
Macleoids Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Versus Tidal Laboratories P. Ltd.
The acquiescence in relation to the use of a mark disentitles the proprietor of the mark to oppose it from being used. The case Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd versus Tidal Laboratories P Ltd 2006 (32) PTC 221(Bom) amply lays down the law in this matter. Also that registration of a trademark is not a crucial factor in denying relief in a passing off action.
India
10 May 2006
9
NSTA POWER vs. AMCO INSTA POWER – Suit For Declaration
Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd is a reputed manufacturer of tractors and farm equipments. They started a division to manufacture and market tubular and flat batteries to be used in UPS, Inverters etc. Amco Batteries limited is an associate company. Amco Batteries Limited granted a licence in favour of the Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd to use the trademark AMCO.
India
27 Mar 2006
10
TATA - Principle Of Well-Known Mark Upheld
Sandyz Confezioni S.P.A, an Italy based company, filed for the registration of the trademark letters ‘ST’, which appears to be a geometrical device in respect of articles of ‘sport clothing’.
India
24 Mar 2006
11
Delay In Instituting Passing Off Action Not Condonable
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., moved an ad-interim application for the action of passing off under the provisions of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1999, where in the Macleods Pharmaceuticalss sought an injunction from the court, to restrain the Tidal Laboratories from using the impugned trade mark "Rabemax" or any other mark bearing similarity to the Macleods Pharmaceuticals’s mark "Rabemac".
India
21 Mar 2006
Links to Result pages
 
1