Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The unauthorized use of the “LIV” element in a manner that does not materially differentiate the defendants’ mark from the plaintiffs’ well-established “Liv.52” mark amounts to a violation of the plaintiffs’ statutory rights.

high court weekly round up
High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“It is intriguing as to why a reputed company such as the defendant company, Wipro Enterprises would launch its product, also pertaining to female reproductive hygiene, almost 22 years later, using the identical trade mark as that of the plaintiffs, Himalaya Wellness Co.”