Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
|
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday allowed an ex-parte order for Britannia for a situation documented by the organization charging encroachment of its 'Good Day' brand name. The request was passed by Justice Sanjeev Narula, who saw that if an ex-parte order isn't allowed, it is probably going to result in huge losses to Britannia.
In its suit, Britannia claimed that Good Day Oral Care was at real fault for brand name encroachment, copyright infringement, passing off, dilution and unjustifiable competition, and in this manner sought for damages and order of injunction against the respondent, Good Day Oral Care. Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi informed the Court that Britannia came to know about this issue in August 2021 and the fact that the respondent even has a domain name, 'gooddayoralcare.com.' He further presented that the mala fide intention of the respondents is apparent from the way that they embraced the imprint 'Good Day', however, had likewise wrongly taken on a few portrayals of Britannia's 'smile device', which are underhanded when assembled.
The counsel on behalf of the complainant i.e., Britannia contended that in the manner in which the brand name is being utilized, the overall population will connect the respondents' item with the complainants’, and this creates turmoil according to the purchaser. These contentions were gone against by Senior Advocate G Tushar Rao, who expressed that the imprint 'Good Day' is a nonexclusive one utilized by a few different elements. Since it has been enrolled for some different elements, the offended party can't guarantee an imposing business model over the imprint or look for an order against the respondents on this ground.
He further presented that there are more than 25 such enlistments of the imprint 'Good Day', and thusly, the Court may not allow an ex-parte request without offering the respondent a chance to document a composed assertion and reaction to the application. He additionally put in question the jurisdiction of the Court by buying the complainants’ item online. He expressed that depending on this purchase, the jurisdiction of this matter should lie in Chennai.
Sethi, then again, contended that the brand name is referred to is notable, and has been announced so by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), in a request passed on December 23, 2020. In the wake of hearing the two opponents finally, the Court was leaned to pass the injunction for Britannia.
The request expressed, "In the at first sight assessment of the Court, there is adequate material set on record by the Offended party which exhibits that Offended party's imprint has been recognized to be a notable imprint. The Offended party would, subsequently, reserve an option to look for directive depending upon Section 29(4) (b) of the Trade Marks Act 1999."
The respondent was controlled from selling (on offline or on online stages), assembling, promoting, and advertising merchandise bearing the 'Good Day' mark. The Court additionally coordinated that the domain name 'gooddayoralcare.com' be brought down, and requested the litigant to conform to the request within about fourteen days. Hence the matter will be heard next on December 4.
Tags : #britannia #good day #high court #delhi #injunction #trademark #copyright #consumers #copy #infringement
Allow Cookies!By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.