Moroccanoil Israel Limited vs Modicare Limited

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
MUKTA GUPTA
Moroccanoil Israel Limited – Appellant
Versus
Modicare Limited – Respondent

Table of Content
1. plaintiffs establish presence and use of trademark. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. plaintiffs argue likelihood of consumer confusion. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. defendant asserts descriptive use of trademark. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. court analysis of trademark similarity. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
5. legal tests for trademark distinctiveness applied. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
6. court's conclusions regarding trademark protection. (Para 28 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 36)
7. decision to maintain interim injunction and stay proceedings. (Para 37 , 38)

JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J.

I.A. 1471/2019 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC).

I.A. 16720/2019 (under Section 124 of the Trademarks Act by Defendant).

1. By I.A. 1471/2019, the Plaintiffs seek an interim order for injunction restraining the defendant, its partners or proprietor, officers, servants, agents, distributors, wholesalers, dealers, retailers or any other person acting for and on its behalf from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any manner with regard to products and services bearing the trademark/logo "MOROCCANOIL" by itself or with words or variant or any other trademark/trade name/