Author name: Mathews P. George

Mathews is a graduate of West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata. He pursued LLM in 'IP and Competition Law' from the Munich Intellectual Property Law Centre (a joint collaboration of Max Plank Institute for Innovation and Competition, University of Augsburg, Technical University of Munich and George Washington University, Washington). His areas of practice include Technology Law in general (IPR, Competition Law, Data Protection Law etc) Corporate Law, Contract Law and Public Law (Constitutional Law and Criminal Law). He practises law and policy at both national and international levels. Presently, he is in Kerala. In addition to litigation before various courts in Kerala, he is also involved in various national and international policy and academic initiatives.

The Delhi High Court and an Anti-Suit Injunction – Part II

/ By / Trademark

[Please read Part I of this two-part post for the summary of the judgment discussed herein] Introduction I am unable to agree with the judgment of Delhi High Court on various counts. At the outset, this is an ex-parte proceeding. The evidentiary threshold, as held by the Supreme Court in Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani (AIR 2003 SC 2508), is as follows: “33. ………In the absence of denial of plaint averments the burden of proof on the plaintiff is […]

The Delhi High Court and an Anti-Suit Injunction – Part II Read More »

The Delhi High Court and an Anti-Suit Injunction – Part I

/ By / Trademark

The Delhi High Court recently granted an anti-suit injunction in HT Media Ltd v. Brainlink International in an ex-parte interim injunction proceedings. Part I of this two part post shall summarise the judgment. Part II shall critically analyse the judgment. Brief Facts The plaintiff owns the trademarks “Hindustan” and “Hindustan times” under Class 16 and Class 38. The defendant owns the domain name http://www.hindustan.com. The negotiations between the plaintiff and the defendant for handing over the domain name were not

The Delhi High Court and an Anti-Suit Injunction – Part I Read More »

Global Trademark Report Card, 2019 (Special 301 Submission) – II

/ By / Trademark

This is the second and last post covering submissions with respect to trademark (the one first can be viewed here). While making comments, I have relied on inputs provided by various practising lawyers based out of Delhi and other parts of India. Court Proceedings: The Report notes that, ‘it may require at least two-to-three years for court proceedings to be decided, sometimes longer (up to seven years), particularly in courts other than the Delhi High Court. The Commercial Courts Act,

Global Trademark Report Card, 2019 (Special 301 Submission) – II Read More »

Global Trademark Report Card, 2019 (Special 301 Submission) – I

/ By / Trademark

In these posts, from an Indian perspective, I shall discuss the main points of ‘2019 Global Trademark Report Card’ by Trademark Working Group (Special 301 Submission for 2020) [For complete list of documents, click here]. i) Certification standards The submission expresses its disapproval over the procedure for registration of certification marks (especially on 4-month opposition period regarding certification mark standards). It says that, as a result of the procedure, the owner of the mark may lose control over its certification

Global Trademark Report Card, 2019 (Special 301 Submission) – I Read More »

CISAC Global Collections Report – 2019

/ By / Copyright

CISAC is the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers. Its stated objective is to ‘protect the rights and promote the interests of creators across all regions of the world and artistic fields; music, audiovisual, drama, literature and visual arts’. It aims to ‘foster a legislative environment that supports the cultural and creative industries, thereby contributing to both cultural diversity and economic growth worldwide’. [For more details, please click here.] According to Wikipedia, it is the world’s largest international

CISAC Global Collections Report – 2019 Read More »

Appreciating the Fundamentals of Trade Secrets Law – I

/ By / Others, Trade Secret

I discussed a trade secret case law recently. I wrote that I would discuss some of the fundamental aspects from a comparative law perspective. As a prelude, I can only discuss the broad contours of trade secret protection in a blog post. I am limiting the discussion of this post to fundamentals of trade secret protection and US position. I shall discuss the EU position in a later post. If specific questions are asked, I shall try to answer them.

Appreciating the Fundamentals of Trade Secrets Law – I Read More »

GoI Approves Patent Prosecution Highway Program

/ By / Patent

Government of India approved the proposal for Bilateral Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programme between Indian Patent Office under Controller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marktis (CGPDTM), Government of India and Patent Offices of other interested countries/regions. The maiden initiative is with Japanese Patent Office (JPO). It will be run on a pilot basis for a period of three years. What is a Patent Prosecution Highway Programme? The word “prosecution” is not to be understood as in Criminal Law. Broadly

GoI Approves Patent Prosecution Highway Program Read More »

Trade Secret Case Law: Steer Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. Glaxosmithkline Consumer & Ors.

/ By / Trade Secret

This is a case on trade secret / confidential information. The Indian jurisprudence on trade secret law is still at a nascent stage. While discussing this case, I am limiting the scope to the issue of protection of trade secret / confidential information only. Facts This is a commercial appeal filed under Section 13 (1A) of the Commercial Courts Act read with relevant provisions of CPC. The Appellant had earlier unsuccessfully pleaded for an interim injunction at the Court of

Trade Secret Case Law: Steer Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. Glaxosmithkline Consumer & Ors. Read More »

Madras HC in Miss Kajal Aggarwal v. The Managing Director, M/s V.V. D & Sons Pvt. Ltd

/ By / Copyright

This appeal on the Original Side (Original Side Appeal No.269 of 2017), was  filed under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of the O.S. Rules  read with Clause 15 of the  Letters Patent  against the  judgment and decree dated 03.07.2017 delivered in C.S.No.635 of 2011. The dispute was inter alia pertaining to the extent of copyright protection over the subject-matter cinematograph film. The judgment is available here. Brief facts The appellant-actress is a well-known actress in South India. In early stages of

Madras HC in Miss Kajal Aggarwal v. The Managing Director, M/s V.V. D & Sons Pvt. Ltd Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: Novartis Pursues Aggressive Patent Strategy with Respect to Drug Vildagliptin

/ By / Patent

According to Times of India, Novartis obtained favourable court orders restraining five Ahmedabad-based pharma companies from manufacturing its patented drug for diabetes, Vildagliptin. Further, citing validity of its patent till 09 December 2019, Novartis moved the commercial court in Vadodara to ensure that four other companies do not get into production of the drug. It is reported that Novartis approached the Court after obtaining the requisite information from the State Government.

SpicyIP Tidbit: Novartis Pursues Aggressive Patent Strategy with Respect to Drug Vildagliptin Read More »

Scroll to Top