Judgments On Intellectual Property Rights Cases - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Judgments On Intellectual Property Rights Cases

Description:

Judgments on Intellectual Property Rights protecting infringement troubles, Speedy Trial of such instances, Spurious Drugs, Registered Trade Mark & Registration of a drug as imaginative. Five vital Judgments on Intellectual Property Rights protecting infringement troubles, Speedy Trial of such instances, Spurious Drugs, Registered Trade Mark & Registration of a drug as imaginative. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:0

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Judgments On Intellectual Property Rights Cases


1
Trademark Registration in India Sunbrio
  • For more details visit _at_https//www.sunbrio.com
    /trademark-registration/

2
Judgments On Intellectual Property Rights Cases
3
  • The Coca-Cola Company Vs. Bisleri International
    Pvt. Ltd Manu/DE/2698/2009
  • IPR Law- Infringement Export Threats
    Jurisdiction

4
In the present remember, the defendant, by way of
a grasp settlement, had sold and assigned the
trademark MAAZA which includes system rights,
understanding, intellectual assets rights,
goodwill and so forth for India most effective.
With admire to a mango fruit drink referred to as
MAAZA. In 2008, the defendant filed a utility
for registration of the trademark MAAZA in Turkey
commenced exporting fruit drink under the
trademark MAAZA. The defendant dispatched a
prison be aware repudiating the settlement
between the plaintiff and the defendant, main to
the prevailing case. It was held by means of the
court docket that the aim to apply for the
trademark except for the direct or oblique use of
the trademark was enough to present jurisdiction
to the court to decide on the difficulty. The
courtroom, in the long run, granted an interim
injunction in the direction of the defendant
(Bisleri) from the usage of the trademark MAAZA
in India as well as for export marketplace, which
becomes held to be an infringement of trademark
5
2. Novartis v. Union of India CIVIL APPEAL
Nos. 2706-2716 OF 2013 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C)
Nos. 20539-20549 OF 2009 IPR Law- Rejection of
a patent for a Drug which was not inventive or
had an superior efficacy-
6
Novartis filed a utility to patent one among its
drugs called Gleevec by covering it under the
word invention noted in Section 3 of the Patents
Act, 1970. The Supreme Court rejected their
utility after a 7-yr lengthy war via the usage of
giving the following reasons Firstly there has
been no invention of a latest drug, as a mere
discovery of a current drug could not quantity to
the invention. Secondly, Supreme Court upheld the
view that underneath the Indian Patent Act for
grant of pharmaceutical patents aside from
proving the conventional tests of novelty,
revolutionary step and alertness, there's a brand
new test of stronger therapeutic efficacy for
claims that cowl incremental changes to current
tablets which additionally Novartiss drug did
not qualify. This became a landmark judgment due
to the fact the court docket appeared beyond the
technicalities and into the truth that the
attempt of such corporations to evergreen their
patents and making them inaccessible at nominal
prices.
7
  • Bajaj Auto Limited Vs. TVS Motor Company Limited
    JT 2009 (12) SC 103
  • IPR Law- Dispute over Patent for the Use of
    Twin-Spark Plug Engine Technology Speedy
    disposal of Intellectual property rights cases-

8
The Supreme Court of India by means of this
landmark judgment has directed all of the courts
in India for quick trial and disposal of highbrow
property associated cases in the courts in India.
In two-year-old dispute involving two companies,
which had been locked in a patent dispute over
the utilization of a twin-spark plug engine
science, the Supreme court docket found out that,
suits on the subject of the issues of patents,
logos, and copyrights are pending for years and
years and litigation is most of the time fought
between the parties about the transitory
injunction. The Supreme court docket directed
that listening to in the mental property matters
will have to proceed on each day basis and the
final judgment must accept on the whole inside
four months from the date of the submitting of
the suit. The Supreme courtroom further directed
to the entire courts and tribunals within the
nation to punctually and faithfully perform the
aforesaid orders.
9
Contact Us SunBrio Consultancy Pvt.
Ltd. 1202/32, 2nd Floor, Bhagya
Building,Opposite Coronet Hotel, Apte
Road,Shivajinagar, Pune 411 004,Maharashtra,
INDIA Visit https//www.sunbrio.comEmail
 consultancy_at_sunbrio.comPhone  91 972 118
4433
About PowerShow.com