Mathews P. George

Mathews is a graduate of National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata. His interest in intellectual property was kindled when he bagged the second position in his second year of Law School (in the prestigious Nani Palkhiwala Essay Competition on Intellectual Property). His stint as a student of Prof. Shamnad Basheer further accentuated his interest in intellectual property. Winner of almost a dozen essay competitions in his Law School days, he was involved in various research and policy initiatives relating to intellectual property. Mathews is, currently, based out of Munich, Germany. He had earlier done his LLM in 'IP and Competition Law' from Munich Intellectual Property Law Centre (jointly run by Max Plank Institute for Innovation and Competition, University of Augsburg, Technical University of Munich and George Washington University, Washington).

Copyright

V. Prabhakar v. M/S. Saga Films: Madras High Court on Interim Injunction and Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act

by
Leave a Comment

The Madras High Court, vide judgment dated 17 November 2022, held that the pre-institution mediation and settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act is mandatory and rejected the plaint for injunction against the release of Tamil movie ‘Yugi’. Brief Facts The petitioner, V. Prabhakar, filed a plaint dated 16 November 2022 alleging that the movie ‘Yugi’ (which was to be released on 18 November 2022) infringed his copyright over the Malayalam movie ‘Dasharatham’ (released in 1989). The petitioner…


Read More »
Others Trademark

Delhi High Court on “Fly Higher” in Frankfinn v. Vistara

by
Leave a Comment

In Frankfinn Aviation Service Private Limited v. Tata SIA Airlines, the Delhi High Court vacated the ex parte interim injunction (granted vide order dated 21 January 2022) where the High Court restrained Vistara from using “Fly Higher” in its advertisements, logos etc. In its order dated 28 October 2022, the High Court vacated the interim injunction on various grounds. I intend to confine the discussion to  the two fundamental grounds relied upon by the High Court. Vistara did not use…


Read More »
Patent

Kerala HC directs DPIIT to consider representation for issue of Compulsory License for Breast Cancer Drug

by
Leave a Comment

The Kerala High Court vide Order dated 14 June 2022 directed the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) to consider the representation for issue of compulsory license for the drug Ribociclib. Background The writ petitioner is a breast cancer patient. She filed a writ petition in the High Court of Kerala arguing that the treatment costs Rs. 63,480/- per month out of which Ribociclib alone costs Rs. 58,140/- per month. According to the petitioner, Ribociclib is not…


Read More »
Others

Delhi High Court on ‘Specified Value’ of IP suits under Commercial Courts Act

by
14 Comments

Justice Pratibha Singh of the Delhi High Court, vide judgment dated 3 June 2022 in Vishal Pipes Limited v. Bhavya Pipe Industry, held that all the IPR disputes, irrespective of their valuations, should be listed before the commercial district court judges. If the subject-matter IP is valued below 3 lakhs rupees, the Court will examine whether the valuation is correct or not. If the valuation is found to be below 3 lakhs rupees, the suit will be treated as a…


Read More »
Others

South African Competition Commission on excessive pricing of breast cancer treatment drug

by
Leave a Comment

On 8 February 2022, the Competition Commission of South Africa filed a referral with the Competition Tribunal for prosecution of Roche on alleged excessive pricing of its breast cancer treatment drug, Trastuzumab. The Commission cited contravention of Section 8(1)(a) of the South African Competition Act. “8. Abuse of dominance prohibited (1) It is prohibited for a dominant firm to— (a) charge an excessive price to the detriment of consumers or customers; …… (2) If there is a prima facie case…


Read More »
Copyright

Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. DXC Technology Private Limited – Analysis II

by
1 Comment

Earlier Posts: Summary and Analysis I Is it mandatory to be a member of copyright society to carry out the business of issuing or granting licences in respect of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works incorporated in a cinematograph film or sound recordings? I am of the view that the copyright framework gives authors and owners of right an option to join or not join a copyright society in order to conduct the business of issuing or granting licences in…


Read More »
Copyright Others

Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. DXC Technology Private Limited – Analysis I

by
Leave a Comment

For summary of the case, click here. Section 33 and Business of granting licenses through Copyright Societies 33. Registration of Copyright society.— (1) No person or association of persons shall, after coming into force of the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 1994 (38 of 1994) commence or, carry on the business of issuing or granting licences in respect of any work in which copyright subsists or in respect of any other rights conferred by this Act except under or in accordance with…


Read More »
Others

Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. DXC Technology Private Limited – Summarising the judgment (Part I)

by
Leave a Comment

On 8 December 2021, the Madras High Court delivered an important judgment concerning copyright law. The High Court held that the business of granting copyright licenses can be carried out only through the copyright societies. Finding that Novex Communications (the assignee of the copyright) did not fall within the definition of the copyright society, the High Court dismissed its petition seeking for damages and injunction. (paragraph 48) I intend to critically analyse this judgment. In the first post, I shall…


Read More »
Trademark

Supreme Court Dismisses a Transfer Petition Filed In a Trademark Dispute

by
Leave a Comment

This post discusses the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rajkumar Sabu v. M/S Sabu Trade Private Limited. Background The petitioner, claiming to be the owner of the mark ‘SACHAMOTI’, filed a suit against the respondent before the Delhi High Court in 2016 alleging infringement and passing off by the respondent. The respondent filed a private complaint in 2016 against the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Salem under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (Cheating and dishonestly inducing…


Read More »
Drug Regulation Others

DCGI Draws Ire of Delhi High Court for Violating the RTI Act

by
Leave a Comment

The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court headed by Justice Pratibha Singh, in its recent order in Prashant Reddy v DCGI, came down heavily on the drug regulator for egregious violation of the Right to Information Act. The case arose in relation to the report of Dr. T.M. Mohapatra Committee, a committee which was constituted by the Drugs Controller General of India pursuant to the scathing criticisms in the 59th Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on the existing mechanism for…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 18