Case Reviews | Intellepedia

Court Orders Former Employee to Pay Rs. 1 Lakh for Early Resignation

The Delhi court held a former employee liable for Rs. 1 lakh after breaching a training agreement by resigning early. The court denied the injunction against misuse of confidential information due to lack of concrete proof, and did not award interest on the sum claimed.

DISPOWAY Trademark Disposal Set Aside: Hearing Notice Not Received

The Delhi High Court set aside the refusal of the DISPOWAY trademark application due to non-receipt of the hearing notice. The case has been remanded for a fresh hearing and correction of the application’s status.

A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies

The Madras High Court upheld the Patent Office’s refusal of IIT Madras’s patent application for a method of doping potassium into ammonium perchlorate. The judgment clarifies the application of Section 3d and inventive step requirements in Indian patent law.

Jumbo Tramples Haathi Trademark Registration

The Calcutta High Court set aside the Registrar’s decision in a trademark dispute involving similar elephant marks for tea products. The court held that the respondent’s mark was deceptively similar to Girnar’s well-known “JUMBO” mark and allowed Girnar’s appeal.

Green Cross Crosses court’s bridge to win appeal

The Madras High Court set aside the patent refusal order against Green Cross, highlighting errors in the assessment of inventive step and technical disclosure. The case has been remanded for fresh examination within four months, with directions to provide a hearing to Green Cross.

Evaluating Trademark Infringement: Holistic View and Goods Differentiation to Determine Likelihood of Confusion

The Gujarat High Court clarified that trademark infringement requires a holistic comparison of marks and their respective goods or services. The court found no likelihood of confusion between Unisn and Unison, highlighting the need to consider all circumstances and the anti-dissection rule in such cases.

Full and Transparent Disclosure of Material Facts for Ex-parte Injunctions

The Bombay High Court vacated an ex-parte injunction in a trademark dispute due to Atyati’s suppression of material facts regarding Cognizant’s prior logo use. This decision reiterates the necessity for full and transparent disclosure in ex-parte proceedings.

Clarifying Product-by-Process Patent Claims in India – West Bengal Chemicals v. GTZ

The Calcutta High Court has clarified the standards for product-by-process patent claims in India, focusing on the necessity of expert evidence in infringement cases. The decision in West Bengal Chemicals v. GTZ provides important guidance for pharmaceutical patent litigation.

Knowledge Transfer by Former Employee Cannot Be Enforced, Rules the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has clarified that a former employee cannot be compelled to transfer knowledge by mandatory injunction, as such enforcement equates to personal service contracts, which are not specifically enforceable under Indian law. The court relied on established precedents and the Specific Relief Act to reach this conclusion.

Novartis says No to Novarish

The Bombay High Court granted Novartis an injunction against Novarish Healthcare for trademark infringement and passing off. The court found the marks deceptively similar and protected Novartis’s established rights under Indian IP law.