High Court of England and Wales considers trade mark infringement and groundless threats

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 728-729
Author(s):  
Rosie Burbidge
Keyword(s):  
Trade Mark ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
High Court ◽  
Trade Mark Infringement

Jurisdiction for online trade mark infringement in India

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 152-154
Author(s):  
Ashwini Gehlot ◽  
Aklovya Panwar
Keyword(s):  
Trade Mark ◽  
The Internet ◽  
High Court ◽  
Trade Mark Infringement

Abstract Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt Ltd v S & D Hospitality, 2018 Cs (Comm) 111/2017, Delhi High Court, 3 January 2018 In Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt Ltd v S & D Hospitality, the Delhi High Court clarified the issue of jurisdiction regarding trade mark infringement arising out of acts committed on the Internet. The Court upheld its earlier decision of Banyan Tree Holding (P) Limited v A Murali Krishna Reddy & Anr, 2009 and solved the conflicting decisions over the issue.

Intermediary liability for trade mark infringement in India: the Louboutin case

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-152
Author(s):  
Aklovya Panwar ◽  
Ashwini Gehlot
Keyword(s):  
Trade Mark ◽  
High Court ◽  
Trade Mark Infringement ◽  
Intermediary Liability ◽  
First Time

Abstract Christian Louboutin SAS v Nakul Bajaj and Ors, CS (COMM) 344/2018, Delhi High Court (Prathiba M Singh J), 2 November 2018 In Christian Louboutin SAS v Nakul Bajaj and Ors, the Delhi High Court has given for the first time an indispensable ruling to clarify the responsibility and liability of online intermediaries for trade mark infringement. In a subsequent judgment in L’Oreal v Brandworld & Anr (CS(COMM) 980/2016, Prathiba M Singh J, 12 November 2018), the same court has confirmed the approach taken in Louboutin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document