Last Updated:
November 2, 2022

Click here to submit your article
Per Page :


FACTS OF THE CASE In this case, Cipla Limited, the Respondent/Plaintiff, filed a suit for permanent injunction before the Madras High Court. The suit was against Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, the Applicant/Defendant, as it infringed the Respondent/Plaintiff’s copyright and registered trademarks as follows: 1. The Applicant/Defendant imitated and substantially reproduced the artistic packaging, trade dress and labels of the Respondent/Plaintiff’s ‘BUDECORT RESPULES’ and ‘DUOLIN RESPULES’ which amounted to infringement of their copyright in artistic works. These were Budeonide Nebuliser Suspension BP, Levosalbutamol and Ipratropium Bromide Respirator Solution which were used in treating patients with respiratory ailments. 2. The Applicant/Defendant used Read More
0 Views : 68


Introduction: If anyone used the Uber Application as a Driver in California or Massachusetts between August 16, 2009, and February 28, 2019, and if anyone are not bound by Uber’s arbitration clause (either because you validly opted out of arbitration or because Uber has no record of your acceptance on an arbitration agreement), anyone could get a payment from a class action settlement. Company details – Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber) is an American mobility as a service provider, allowing users to book a car and driver to transport them in a way similar to a taxi. It is based in Read More
0 Views : 49

Godrej Properties Ltd. Vs. Goldbricks Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

This appeal was submitted in accordance with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), and it challenges a decision made ex-parte by the learned Sole Arbitrator in response to a Section 17 application submitted by the Respondent. By the contested order, the learned Sole Arbitrator granted ex-parte ad-interim reliefs in accordance with the respondent’s application’s plea paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d). According to the argument, the parties had a legitimate expectation that the arbitral tribunal would hear them out before making a decision on any new Section 17 applications when they were already in front Read More
0 Views : 54

Sony Corp. of America V.s Universal City Studios, Inc.

Facts of the Case Sony created the Betamax video tape recording format in the 1970s. Universal Studios and the Walt Disney Company were among the film industry members concerned about this development, but they were also aware that the United States Congress was nearing the end of a major revision of copyright law and would be hesitant to enact any new safeguards for the film industry. In 1976, the companies chose to sue Sony and its distributors in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, claiming that because Sony was manufacturing a device that could be Read More
0 Views : 68

vodafone merge case

Add description for your Article from here.Name: vignesh Kundekar Subject: LAW Roll no: M2158 TOPIC: Case study Vodafone INTRODUCTION: Vodafone Case study describes the situation when Idea Cellular and Vodafone after the entrance of JIO. So, here is the Vodafone case study which describes the position of Vodafone and Idea Cellular before and post-merger, reasons for the merger, how did merger take place and critical analyses of the merger. Vodafone Company Detail: Came from the UK based Vodafone Group plc. It is a multinational service provider of telecommunications in 22 different countries as of 20th November 2020. And, in India Read More
0 Views : 112


Name _ Suhail Khan Subject _ Law Roll no _ M2150 Case Study Starbucks Introduction : – Starbucks is a chain of stores that sell coffee. A chain is many stores owned by the same company. Many of the stores look the same, and all stores sell the same items, often at the same prices. As well as coffee, Starbucks sells beverages and baked goods. Starbucks Corporation. It’s one of the most successful companies in the world, not only in the coffee shop business. It is so successful because it was able to provide an experience that changed how much Read More
0 Views : 71

Legal Battle Between Amul And Anul For the Trade Name

After a 20-year legal battle, Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Limited, better known as Amul, was able to successfully defend its trademark against Shri Shakti Dairy and Kuldeep Enterprises, who were found guilty of violating the Amul trademark by the Commercial Court in Vadodara. Shri Shakti Dairy and Kuldeep Enterprises were found guilty of selling and promoting their products under names that resemble the original trade name Amul. According to the Vadodara Commercial Court, the defendants’ use of the term “Anul” violated the plaintiff “Amul’s” trademark and trademark rights. The court determined that the rhyme between the plaintiff’s trade Read More
0 Views : 100

Pacific Coast Coal Mines Ltd Vs Arbuthnot

 INTRODUCTIONS: The company has no power to do any act not authorized expressly or impliedly by its memorandum and any act so done is ultra vires and incapable of ratification, even if every member of the company assents to it.  CONCEPT OF CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE: Doctrine of Constructive notice is nothing but a protection provided to the company against the outsiders. The doctrine of indoor management is completely contrary to it. It is the protection provided to the outsiders against the company. Thus both the doctrines maintain a balance and do not lead to any abuse. One thing that Read More
0 Views : 73

Jitender Bansal vs Domino’s Jubilant FoodWorks Limited.

 INTRODUCTIONS – The case of the complainant is that he ordered food items with OPs on 15.2.2019 and it was Carry Out (Take Away) order. It is averred that when the complainant reached the outlet of Opposite Party No.1 to collect the food items order, they handed over the food without carry bag and when the complainant asked for carry bag, they charged Rs.12/- for it and gave receipt, apart from bill for food items of Rs.261.24/-. It is stated that the charging for a carry bag by the OPs even without mentioning the same at Store, is deficiency Read More
0 Views : 77


In 1996, Nike’s was accused of mistreating and underpaying workers at a foreign facility. Nike’s decided to answer these accusations in various ways. These included press releases, writing letters to editors of various newspapers around the country (USA) and mailing letters to university presidents and athletic directors. A report by former ambassador to the United Nations Andrew Young on the labour conditions at Nike’s production facilities was also published. In the report Young commented positively on the working conditions and found no evidence of the said accusations. In April 1998, respondent Marc Kasky, a California resident, sued Nike’s for unfair Read More
0 Views : 71