IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
A.K. SIKRI
Yonex Kabushiki Kaisha .....Plaintiff
VERSUS
Phillips International & Another .....Defendants
IA No. 5947/2004 in CS (OS) No. 983/2004
Decided On : August 20, 2007
Trademark - Infringement of trademark - Copyright - [YONEKA] - [Infringement of trademark, passing off, and copyright] - [Copyright Act, 1957, Trade Marks Act, 1999] - The court discussed the infringement of trademark, passing off, and copyright in relation to the use of the mark YONEKA, the packaging, and the logo by the defendant, and considered the prior use, registration, and reputation of the trademarks. The court found that it was not appropriate to grant ad interim injunction based on various factors including the established business of the defendant, the delay in filing the suit, and the dispute over prior user. The court dismissed the application for injunction and directed the matter to proceed to trial for framing of issues.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff, a world leader in sports equipment, sought ad-interim injunction to restrain the defendant from using the mark YONEKA, which was allegedly identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademark YONEX. The plaintiff claimed infringement of trademark, passing off, and copyright in relation to the defendant's product packaging and logo. The defendant contested the suit, claiming prior use, registration, and reputation of the trademark YONEKA.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that it was not appropriate to grant ad interim injunction due to various factors, including the established business of the defendant, the delay in filing the suit, and the dispute over prior user. The court dismissed the application for injunction and directed the matter to proceed to trial for framing of issues.
Issues: The issues involved infringement of trademark, passing off, and copyright in relation to the use of the mark YONEKA, the packaging, and the logo by the defendant. The dispute over prior user, registration, and reputation of the trademarks was also a key issue.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the factors of established business, delay in filing the suit, and the dispute over prior user in determining that it was not appropriate to grant ad interim injunction. The court emphasized the need for the matter to proceed to trial for framing of issues.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application for injunction and directed the matter to proceed to trial for framing of issues.
1. By means of this application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff is seeking ad-interim injunction whereby the plaintiff intends to restrain the defendant from manufacturing, marketing, advertising and in any manner dealing in goods or services using the mark/name YONEKA or any other mark/name which is allegedly identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trademark YONEX. The plaintiff, M/s. YONEX Kabushiki Kaisha, is a company incorporated under the laws of Japan and claims that it is world leader in the field of manufacturing and marketing of sports equipment primarily Badminton, Tennis and Golf. Yoneyama Company, the plaintiffs predecessors in business, evolved into the manufacturing of badminton racquets in 1957 and attained huge success. In 1969, it diversified into the tennis racquet. In 1973, the plaintiff changed their company and brand name to YONEX and also adopted a unique and distinctive appearance for the goods of their manufacture in order to distinguish their world class products from those of the others, by introducing the new “YY” logo along with blue and green colour striped background to their products. It is the case of the plaintiff that the label mark consisting of YY YONEX with blue and green striped background instantly became a familiar sight on badminton and tennis courts around the globe. The plaintiff today is the leading worldwide manufacturer and distributor of sports goods equipments and other apparels of their manufacture namely racquets, shuttlecocks, strings, sportswear, apparels including dresses, skirts, blouses, shirts, shorts, jackets, sweaters, pullovers, cardigans, pants, training suits, warm-up suits, sports underwear, head wears, sweatbands, sports shoes, socks for wear and hats, gymnastic and other sporting articles, as also bags, umbrellas and parasols, all under the famous, reputed and well-known trademark YONEX.
2.The plaintiff also boasts of its best distribution network in the sports equipment market across the globe. M/s. Sunrise & Co. (Pte.) Ltd., located at No. 9, Kaki Bukit Crescent, Kaki Bukit Tech Park-I, Singapore – 416 240, Singapore, is the plaintiffs sole distributors for all YONEX products in various Asian countries including India. According to the plaintiff, it has created niche for itself in the sporting world and has been sponsors of major tournaments including Olympics, wherein the plaintiff has been the games official Badminton Equipment supplier, since introduction of Badminton in 1992, and the All England Badminton Championship, where the plaintiff is the exclusive sponsor of the game since 1984. It is number one brand in Badminton with 80% of the competitive players using the YONEX equipments. Name of various top ranking professionals who have endorsed the plaintiffs product in the game of the badminton are given. These include Indian players like Prakash Padukone and P. Gopichand, winners of All England Badminton Championships and also National Champions who have endorsed YONEX products. For this reason, states the plaintiff, YONEX has become a household name in India. The YONEX products, particularly badminton products, are sold in India through 350 dealers and wholesalers.
3.In the present case, we are concerned with a particular product namely shuttlecocks used in the game of badminton. The plea of the plaintiff is that it produces the technologically most advanced shuttlecocks to benefit and enable the players at every level to play their sports at a higher level. These shuttlecocks are also sold under the trade mark/name YONEX. YONEX feather shuttlecocks demonstrate accurate flight stability over distance under varying environmental conditions. From the careful selection of high quality materials to advanced manufacturing process, meticulous attention as to detail goes into the design and production of YONEX feather shuttlecocks to ensure distance stability. These shuttlecoc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.