Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MS. MINI PUSHKARNA, J
ASOCIACION DE PRODUCTORES DE PISCO A.G. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to gi application for pisco. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. factual background of gi applications. (Para 6) |
| 3. petitioner’s arguments on shared history. (Para 7) |
| 4. respondents’ defense of peru's gi rights. (Para 8) |
| 5. judicial observations on gi laws. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. definition and significance of gis. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. comparison between gi act and trade mark act. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. importance of identifying chilean pisco as gi. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. referenced international treaties and recognition. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 10. historical context of pisco production. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 11. legislative actions regarding pisco. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 12. identification of pisco brands and products. (Para 37 , 38) |
| 13. deceptive potential if pisco is unqualified. (Para 39 , 40) |
| 14. clarification on gi law vs. trademark considerations. (Para 41 , 42) |
| 15. focus on geographical connections over history. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 16. assessment for gi validity based on consumer recognition. (Para 46 , 47) |
| 17. misapplication of historical narratives in legal judgments. (Para 48 , 49) |
| 18. clarification of production zones in relation to pisco |
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
