Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Elyon Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Trademarks – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. This is an appeal against an order dated 27 August 2018 passed by the Examiner of Trade Marks in the office of the Registrar of Trade Marks, whereby Application No. 2668081, filed by the appellant, seeking registration of the word mark "ELMENTIN" for a pharmaceutical composition of Amoxycillin and Clavulanic Acid, stands rejected by the Examiner under Section 11(1)(b)1 [11. Relative grounds for refusal of registration. -
(1) Save as provided in Section 12, a trade mark shall not be registered if, because of -
*****
(b) its similarity to an earlier trade mark and the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by the trade mark,
there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, which includes the likelihood of association with the earlier trade mark.] of the Trade Marks Act 1999. The ground of rejection is that the mark is deceptively similar to an existing earlier trade mark "ELEMENTAL", also registered in respect of medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations in Class 5, in favour of one Juggat Pharma Pvt. Ltd.
2. I have heard Ms. Niranjana Kaur, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, learned CGSC for the
The main legal point established is that likelihood of confusion in trade mark jurisprudence is assessed based on phonetic and visual similarity, nature of the goods, and the kind of customer likely ....
Pharmaceutical trademarks with shared descriptive suffix deceptively similar if phonetically alike when viewed as wholes; injunction on prima facie possibility of confusion mandatory, applying strict....
The court affirmed that even slight phonetic and structural similarities between rival trade marks in the pharmaceutical industry can lead to confusion among consumers, warranting protection under tr....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of likelihood of confusion on the part of the public and the principle of comparing composite marks as a whole under Section 11(....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 11(1)(b) of the Trademarks Act to determine the likelihood of confusion based on phonetic similarity and the priority....
The court established that the test for confusing similarity in pharmaceuticals is stringent, with prior registered marks holding superior rights that protect against consumer confusion.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the Trade Marks Act in determining deceptive similarity and infringement of a registered trade mark, including the presumption o....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for a trade mark to be ineligible for registration under Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, there must be a cumulative satisfaction o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of a trademark application can be justified based on phonetic and conceptual similarity with an earlier trademark, likelihood of....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
