Trademark Trouble Brewing: What ‘COX 5001’ Got Wrong About ‘HAYWARDS 5000′
Bombay High Court grants AB Inbev a permanent injunction against Jagpin's "COX 5001" mark, ruling it infringes the "HAYWARDS 5000" and "FIVE THOUSAND" trademarks.
338 articles
Bombay High Court grants AB Inbev a permanent injunction against Jagpin's "COX 5001" mark, ruling it infringes the "HAYWARDS 5000" and "FIVE THOUSAND" trademarks.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction to Himalaya Wellness, restraining Greenland Trading from using deceptively similar marks for ayurvedic products. The Court found a clear risk…
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction to Adidas in a trademark infringement and passing-off case concerning counterfeit socks. The Court also appointed a Local Commissioner for…
The Delhi High Court granted Premji Invest a dynamic injunction to counteract ongoing impersonation and intellectual property fraud. The order allows real-time blocking of deceptive websites and apps,…
The Delhi High Court clarified that prior trademark use is insufficient without proven goodwill in relevant trade or market. The decision in Suparshva Swabs v AGN International highlights…
The Delhi Commercial Court ruled in favour of Carnatic Café in a trademark dispute with a Bengaluru restaurant using “CARNATIC.” The Court found clear infringement and upheld the…
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction in favour of Promodome Communication Private Limited, restraining the defendant from using identical marks and domain names. The decision highlights…
The Delhi High Court upheld Hi-Tech Arai’s claim in the HTA trademark dispute, granting an interim injunction against the defendants for dishonest adoption and use of fabricated evidence.…
The Delhi court granted a permanent injunction against the sale of counterfeit Tommy Hilfiger goods, ordering destruction of seized products. The decision highlights the application of trademark law…
Delhi Court bars use of “X1” and “X1 Racing League” over trademark infringement, upholding plaintiff’s statutory rights despite non-use.