Last Updated:
March 8, 2023

Click here to submit your article
Legal Issues
Per Page :

You have five sub categories

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 : 166


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 : 118

Jk Cement Limited vs Anav Industries & Anr on 23 March, 2022

Introduction: The case involves JK Cement Company which is an Indian multinational cement company. The company headquarter is in Kanpur, India. It is a leading cement manufacturing company in India. The Company has over four decades of experience in cement manufacturing with Grey Cement plants in Nimbahera, Mangrol and Gotan in Rajasthan and in Muddapur, Karnataka. A complaint has been filed by them against Anav Industries and Anr ,where they are being accused of copying the trademark of JK Cement to sell their products to the customers. Case Details: 02.03.2022, Plaintiff from its marketing team received complaints of and inquiries Read More
0 Views : 121

Sri.Shaligram Prasad vs Jumbo King Foods Private Limited

The Plaintiff aka Sri.Shaligram Prasad brought this lawsuit against the Defendant aka Jumbo King Foods Private Limited in an effort to recover Rs. 3,77,529 with expenses and interest. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant is involved in the VADA PAV business and the Defendant is a master franchisee for that industry in the Bengaluru region. Defendant offered the Plaintiff a franchise to operate a VADAPAV business in Bengaluru. The defendant persuaded the plaintiff to pay the franchisor a sum of Rs. 3,37,080/- by suggesting the location at Rajarajeshwari Nagar to conduct such business. The Plaintiff claims that after paying the Read More
0 Views : 138

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 : 120

Britannia Ltd vs ITC Ltd

Britannia Ltd vs ITC Ltd was held on 6 September, 2016 under the judgement of Honourable Justice S. Muralidhar Britannia’s claim A case of trademark infringement brought by Britannia based on its registration of ‘Nutri Choice’ as a trademark and its packaging. Britannia argued that the overall appearance of ITC’s packing was deceptively similar to Britannia’s products. In the case of ‘Nutri Choice Digestive’ and ‘Sunfeast Farmlite 5-Seed Digestive’, it was argued that: 1. Both packs use a red and yellow combination of colours, with yellow on the left and red on the right; 2. Both packs use the words Read More
0 Views : 108

Ashutosh Dubey Vs Netflix

ASHUTOSH DUBEY VS NETFLIX, INC. This was the case were the plaintiff who is an advocate by profession filed a suit against an injunction against Netflix, the defendants for the further streaming of the episodes of a web series called hasmukh which aired on Netflix. The main issue in the case was regarding the defamation, caused due to some derogatory remarks made by the protagonist in a web-series known as “hasmukh”. The Delhi High Court dismissed an application filed by a lawyer, seeking an injunction against Netflix for streaming online content which was derogatory about the legal fraternity. The lawyer Read More
0 Views : 105

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 : 125


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 : 121

Relaxo asserts its Design in the Slippers to stop Aqualite’s use

Indian footwear market is estimated to be US $ 15.5 billion by 2022. With tremendous growth potential, the sector is witnessing an unprecedented investment and launch of footwear directed towards all segments of society. As disposable income rises among Indian consumers, they move up the value chain, demanding products for different uses and occasions. The post discusses a Design infringement and passing off action brought by Relaxo Footwears Limited (Relaxo) before the Delhi High Court against the defendant, Aqualite Industries Pvt Limited (Aqualite). Relaxo seeks to restrain Aqualite from dealing in footwear (slippers), alleging they are imitating their designs and Read More
0 Views : 134