An Indian Perspective on Singapore HC’s Decision in ‘Isetan Tartan’ Trade Mark Dispute
This post analyses the recent decision of the Singapore High Court in Scotch Whisky Association v. Isetan Mitsukoshi Ltd., that involved the trade mark ‘Isetan Tartan’ owned by the Japanese department store chain, Isetan.
A tartan is a cross-checked repeating pattern of different coloured bands, stripes, or lines...
Charminar Case by the Indian Supreme Court in 1996 and the AG’s Opinion in Sky v. Sky Kick
On October 16, 2019 the Advocate General (AG) of the European Court of Justice rendered an opinion in Sky Plc & Ors v. Sky Kick UK Ltd. & Anr. (“the Sky case”) in a reference by Justice Arnold of the England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division).
The AG’s opinion caught my attention because the opinion...
Justice Endlaw’s Lessons on Legal Drafting
Earlier this year, Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw made a concluding remark on the “non-essential verbosity” of a plaintiff in a civil dispute .
He observed that the plaint filed therein was a classic textbook case of how not to draft a plaint, which he felt should have been taught in law schools.Justice Endlaw has...
Place the (Trade Marks) Act Before the Rules: Del HC Directs Registry to Record Grounds of Refusal of Applications
In a much-lauded decision, Justice J. R. Midha of the Delhi High Court has made it easier and quicker for applicants to appeal a decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks arising from a refusal or partial acceptance of a trademark.
This decision arises from a writ petition (Intellectual Property Attorneys...
Indian IP jurisprudence is the real winner in the Monsanto cotton technology case
On 8th January, the Supreme Court of India (India’s highest court) ruled in favour of Monsanto in the much discussed Monsanto Technology v Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd case.
Monsanto had challenged the April 2018 order of a two-judge bench (DB) of the Delhi High Court (DHC) which had revoked Monsanto’s Indian patent...
Excluding “Essentially Biological Processes”: Implications for Monsanto vs Nuziveedu
Section 3(j) of the Indian Patents Act excludes plants, animals and “essentially biological processes” (for the production of plants and animals) from patent protection.
The Delhi High Court relied significantly on European precedents to hold that Monsanto’s claimed invention covering the Bt gene construct and a...
What exactly are geographical indications?
The acid test for a GI product, therefore, is whether the consumers perceive it to originate from a certain geography and attribute the qualities, characteristics or reputation to that region.
Recent conversations around geographical indication have involved cases such as a GI tag on Alphonso mangoes from Ratnagiri...
Supreme Court of India set to rule in crucial plant innovation dispute
There are important legal issues at stake in the Supreme Court of India’s ongoing review of the patentability of Monsanto’s Bt Cotton technology, explains K&S Partners’ Deepa K. Tiku
All eyes in India are currently on the country’s Supreme Court where the agro-biotech giant Monsanto is battling to reclaim its...
What exactly are GIs and who can apply for GI status
Recent conversations around geographical indication have involved cases such as a GI tag on Alphonso mangoes from Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg, the Coffee Board applying for GI to protect Araku coffee, and the tussle between Odisha and West Bengal over the rosogolla.
What exactly are geographical indications? Who can...