Landmark trademark case judgement

Background[ edit ] Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States[ edit ] Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States had been in place in certain states since colonial days. Marriage to a slave was never legal.

Landmark trademark case judgement

In the instant case, there was a patent dispute subsisting for over two years between two countries involved in a dispute for using twin spark plug engine technology.

Looking at the pendency of appeals relating to Intellectual Property Rights cases in Indian courts, J. Markandey Katju speaking for himself and J. Ashok Kumar Ganguly directed all the courts in India for expeditious disposal of cases involving trademarks, patent and copywrights.

The Supreme Court also directed the judgement should be given within four months from the date when the suit was filed. The Supreme Court also directed to all the courts and tribunals in the country to punctually and faithfully carry out the aforesaid orders.

Bayer Corporation and ors.

Landmark trademark case judgement

Union of India and ors. It was also held that mere market approval of a drug does not lead to patent infringement and the jurisdiction of which does not lie with Drug authorities.

The Coca-Cola Company Vs. It was also held that the exporting of goods from a country is to be considered as sale within the country from where the goods are exported and the same amounts to infringement of trade mark.

Licensing ›

In this case, Bisleri Ltd. It was held by the court that the intention to use the trade mark besides direct or indirect use of the trade mark was sufficient to give jurisdiction to the court to decide on the issue.

The court finally granted an interim injunction against the defendant Bisleri. Union of India Civil Appeal No. But the same was rejected by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs.

The Supreme Court held that Novartis failed to meet the requirement of novelty. And also thereby failing to qualify for the test of invention as provided for under in section 2 1 j and section 2 1 ja of the Patents Act, as a result of the various publications and disclosures already made about the beta crystalline form of the compound used in the drug, Imatinib Mesylate.

Further the court decided to interpret efficacy as laid down in section 3 d of the Act on lines of therapeutic efficacy and not merely physical efficacy. It held that though physical efficacy of imatinib mesylate in beta crystalline form is enhanced in comparison to other forms.

But since there was no substantive and conclusive material and evidence to prove that beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate will produce an enhanced or superior therapeutic efficacy, Novartis failed to meet the requirements under Section 3 d of the Act.

The Supreme Court went with the therapeutic efficacy interpretation over physical efficacy owing to the fact that the compound was of medicinal value.

Archives and past articles from the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News, and 40 landmark judgments that changed the course of India In this landmark case regarding election disputes, the primary issue was the validity of clause 4 of the 39th Amendment Act. The Supreme. In a recent case, newly amended Chinese trademark legislation was put to the test when the American speciality coffee retailer Starbucks accused a local Shanghai company of copying their trading name and logo. Landmark Judgement for Starbucks in Chinese IPR Case. Retrieved Landmark Judgement for Starbucks in Chinese IPR Case.

C No and of Delhi High Court The question when the patent was considered to be granted under the Patent Act was decided in this case.

Eastern Book Company and others v.Latest Articles Listed Below How Filing Dowry Complaints Been Made Easier In India:Mahatma Gandhi once said "Any young man, who makes dowry a condition to marriage, discredits his education and country and dishonors womanhood".-Yash Dahiya- Posted: /11/10 Case Analysis- Vishaka and others v/s State of Rajasthan: It is a landmark judgment case in the history of sexual harassment .

Landmark Cases: R. v. Feeney A. Summary of Case In while a murder investigation, police barged into the accused house when there was no answer at the door. The house was an equipment trailer and without any search warrant or permission the house was searched.

Top 10 Landmark Judgements of Intellectual Property Rights Law - Legal News India, Legal News World, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of India, Delhi high court.

Reprints ›

Court Judgment Records Search - monstermanfilm.comimited Record Searches · Over 1 Billion Records · Get Unlimited Searches/10 ( reviews). Archives and past articles from the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News, and Dear Twitpic Community - thank you for all the wonderful photos you have taken over the years.

We have now placed Twitpic in an archived state.

Landmark Judgments in India - Historical cases, famous Trials