No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

A stylized laboratory scene showing a large blue capsule being constructed by steampunk-style mechanical arms, with sparks flying. A wooden sign next to the capsule reads "UNDER CONSTRUCTION," symbolizing a drug still in development. Various lab equipment is visible in the background. Featured image for article: No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

In the case of Helsinn Healthcare SA vs AET Laboratories, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a patent infringement action filed in anticipation of future infringement. The Court examined the territorial reach of Indian courts in web-based patent matters and reaffirmed the principles required to sustain quia timet actions.

Read more about No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case

Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case Featured image for article: Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case

The Madras High Court ruled in favor of Wunderbar Films in its copyright dispute with Netflix over the unauthorized use of behind-the-scenes footage. Netflix’s applications challenging jurisdiction and seeking rejection of the plaint were dismissed. The Court held that territorial jurisdiction was valid, pre-suit mediation was not mandatory due to urgency, and combining statutory and common law remedies was permissible.

Read more about Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case