Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases – Part I

/ By / Drug Regulation, Patent

[This guest post is authored by our former blogger Varsha Jhavar and Surbhi Nautiyal. Varsha is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.  Surbhi is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur. The views expressed here are those of the authors’ alone.] At the Delhi High Court’s (DHC) bidding, major developments have taken place in the rare diseases space in India. These include the introduction of […]

Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases – Part I Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( August 14 – August 20)

/ By / Copyright, Drug Regulation, Patent, Plant Variety Protection, Trademark

Last week was full of exciting discussions on the blog. Niyati wrote on the Delhi High Court order rejecting the appeal against Pepsico’s potato plant variety revocation order. Aparajita wrote on the potential impact of the recently passed Jan Vishwas Bill, 2023. We also had a guest post by Aditya Gupta on the Delhi High Court Division Bench’s order in Google v. DRS Logistics. Anything important we’re missing out on? Drop us a comment below!  This Weekly Review is co-authored

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( August 14 – August 20) Read More »

Going Back to First Principles – A Nuanced Understanding of Infringement in Google v DRS

/ By / Trademark

We are pleased to bring to you a guest post by Aditya Gupta on the recent Delhi High Court Division Bench order in Google v. DRS. Aditya is an attorney at Ira Law and represents Google in trademark litigation relating to keyword advertising. He graduated from National Law University, Jodhpur and then pursued a masters in law from Harvard Law School. Before co-founding Ira Law, he was part of another law firm for 7 years and then an associate at

Going Back to First Principles – A Nuanced Understanding of Infringement in Google v DRS Read More »

Jharkhand High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Alleging Copyright Infringement Against a Professor

/ By / Copyright

A couple of weeks ago, I discussed the case of a law student in Bengaluru who alleged copyright infringement against two assistant professors. Just a couple of weeks later I’ve now come across news of another student alleging copyright infringement, (Paras Kumar Choudhary vs The State of Jharkhand), but this time a criminal proceeding was instituted against the professor! This was later quashed by the Jharkhand High Court on August 10, 2023.  The proceeding was initiated by one Dr. Shambhu

Jharkhand High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Alleging Copyright Infringement Against a Professor Read More »

Jan Vishwas Bill 2023: Small businesses, competition and public health set up to lose?

/ By / Others

As reported, both Houses of Parliament recently passed the Jan Vishwas Bill, 2023 (JV Bill). This bill seeks to promote business by reducing penalties and decriminalising offences across 42 legislations. Major intellectual property rights laws – the Copyright Act, 1957, the Patents Act, 1970, the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Geographical Indications Act, 1999, have also been amended. We had discussed salient features of the JV Bill, 2022 along with its limitations in a post here. The major amendments

Jan Vishwas Bill 2023: Small businesses, competition and public health set up to lose? Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: No Cure for the Plaintiff’s Heartburns? Delhi High Court Rejects an Interim Injunction Application against Defendant’s Anti-Acidity Drug Despite Finding Trademark Infringement

/ By / Trademark

On August 16, the Delhi High Court passed an order in Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Finecure Pharmaceuticals which is sure to have caught the attention of trademark lawyers. The court refused to grant an interim injunction to the plaintiff despite finding that the defendant had infringed the plaintiff’s mark. The court reasoned this by holding that prima facie trademark registration seems invalid, questioning the veracity of the registration order by the Trademark Registry and also finding that since the defendants were

SpicyIP Tidbit: No Cure for the Plaintiff’s Heartburns? Delhi High Court Rejects an Interim Injunction Application against Defendant’s Anti-Acidity Drug Despite Finding Trademark Infringement Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: Non-Working will not Work: Delhi High Court’s Inquisitorial Assessment of Interim Injunctions 

/ By / Patent

Those familiar with IP litigation in India would know the significance of obtaining an interim injunction since that “interim” period is often so long that it can end up having significant commercial value as well! And while there have been numerous instances where the courts have looked past their obligations to pass reasoned orders while granting interim relief, I recently came across an interesting order from the Delhi High Court where the court denied the relief which the plaintiff was

SpicyIP Tidbit: Non-Working will not Work: Delhi High Court’s Inquisitorial Assessment of Interim Injunctions  Read More »

A meme with caption "Aloo Lelo"

Chip and Del(hi) High Court: Pepsico Loses Appeal on Famous Potato Chip Plant Variety

/ By / Plant Variety Protection

On July 5, the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal by PepsiCo India Holdings against an order passed by the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority in 2021, thereby effectively revoking Pepsico’s registration of the FL 2027 potato variety. The revocation application was filed by notable farmers’ rights activist, Kavitha Kuruganti, who is associated with the Alliance for Sustainable And Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), an organisation which aims to strengthen sustainable agricultural livelihoods. Kuruganti had previously accused Pepsico (apparently,

Chip and Del(hi) High Court: Pepsico Loses Appeal on Famous Potato Chip Plant Variety Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 7- August 13)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Last week was full of exciting discussions on the blog. Praharsh wrote on the Delhi High Court’s Division Bench order staying the operation of the Single Judge’s direction in Vifor “Product by Process Claims” case and on the Oppositions Status Report filed by the Trademark Registry before the Delhi High Court. Mathews discussed the Delhi High Court’s order directing for strict interpretation of the PCT timelines while filing the national phase applications. We also had guest posts by Rahul Bajaj

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 7- August 13) Read More »

A Division Bench Stays the Directions in the Vifor v. MSN Labs ‘Product by Process Claims’ Order

/ By / Patent

On 24 July, 2023 the Delhi High Court had passed a detailed order in Vifor v. MSN Laboratories, reading Process by Product patent claims within the Indian patent regime. Explaining the nitty gritty of these types of claims, the court refused to grant an injunction to Vifor (the plaintiff) and allowed the defendants to launch their products in the market. Merely 17 days later, a Division Bench of the High Court has now placed a stay (pdf) on the operation

A Division Bench Stays the Directions in the Vifor v. MSN Labs ‘Product by Process Claims’ Order Read More »

Scroll to Top