2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 17853
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 109/2024
Page1/36
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Reserved on
: 16thApril,2024
Pronounced on
: 24th April, 2024
+
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 109/2024, I.A. 8220/2024, I.A. 8221/2024 & I.A.
8222/2024
WIEDEN+KENNEDY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through:
Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Mr. Essenese Obhan,
Ms. Yogita Rathore, Ms. Anjuri Saxena and
Mr. Rishab, Advocates.
versus
JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LIMITED
..... Respondent
Through:
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Saikrishna Rajagopal, Mr. Saket Sikri, Mr.
Naman Joshi, Mr. Angad Singh Makkar,
Mr. Akshat Agrawal, Ms. Ayushi Bansal,
Mr. Manish Kharbanda, Ms. Ekta Gupta,
Mr. Gurpreet, Ms. Shruti Joshi, Ms. Riya
Kumar, Mr. Sumair, Ms. Shreya Sethi, Ms.
Gauri Rasgotra and Ms. Priyashree Sharma,
Advocates.
ANISH DAYAL, J.
%
JUDGEMENT
1. This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “A&C Act”) was referred to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court since it related to protection of intellectual property rights of the petitioner. Petitioner seeks a restraint before the commencement of Page2/36 arbitration, on the respondent, from distributing and publishing the impugned video titled ‘Jindal Steel- the Steel of India’ on all platforms including videos, social media etc. during the pendency of arbitration proceedings or in any manner infringing petitioner’s copyright in the ad film campaign which was prepared by petitioner under the agreement (hereinafter referred to as “Services Agreement”) dated 8th May, 2023 executed between the parties. Relief is also sought for recognizing the petitioner as the original creator and copyright owner of the impugned video, and restraining the respondent from disclosing petitioner’s confidential information i.e. the impugned video and from creating any third-party rights in the said intellectual property / confidential information.
2. The petitioner, an advertising agency, is the Indian Arm of Wieden + Kennedy Inc., which is a global creative company claiming to have developed some of world’s best-known brands. Petitioner claims to have been instrumental in building India's biggest brands and campaigns including Make in India, IndiGo, Oberoi Hotels amongst others and global brands like Nike, Airbnb, and Audi.
3. Petitioner had previously been engaged by respondent for developing their ‘Steel of Oman’ campaign and ‘Jindal Panther TMT Rebars’ campaign which were successfully executed. In April 2023, Services Agreement was executed between petitioner and respondent to develop a brand campaign to bring out role of steel in shaping the nation, particularly in the 76th year of Indian independence and collaterally, make respondent (Jindal) synonymous with steel. The scope of work under the Services Agreement involved deliverables of a Television Commercial (TVC) / digital film or a series of films (one up to Page3/36 four) in case of a multiple film approach. Project milestones included - (a) arriving at a strategic platform, (b) core creative idea leading to the brand campaign; (c) film production, (d) final film presentation and release. All this was to be executed within 4 months of the effective date i.e. 1st May to 31st August, (term). Consideration for provision of services was agreed at Rs. 1.75 crores plus taxes which was to be paid in the following manner:
- i.
50% was to be paid immediately, ii.
25% of the fees by end of second month i.e. 30th June 2023, iii.
Balance 25% on completion of the final deliverable, and iv.
within 14 days from the date of invoice for (ii) and (iii) above.
These provisions are encapsulated in clause 3.1 to 3.3 of the Services Agreement.
Relevant provisions of the Services Agreement
4. Clause 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 of the Services Agreement, essentially provided that all advertising materials prepared and presented by the agency and accepted by respondent, will be transferred to respondent, subject to release of all the payments; those rejected by the respondent would remain exclusive property of the petitioner; and all material and services procured from 3rd parties, would subject to receipt of payments, be the property of respondent, subject to other conditions.
5. Termination provisions are inter alia provided in clause 7.1 to 7.3 of the Services Agreement. Clause 7.1 required the terminating party to give 30 days’ prior written notice in case of a no-fault termination, and clause 7.3 required the aggrieved party to notify the party in breach with cure period of 10 days, before Page4/36 terminating the agreement.
6. Confidentiality provisions were encapsulated in clause 9 of the Services Agreement. By clause 11.4, the agreement was subject to jurisdiction of courts in New Delhi. Dispute Re