INDUSLAW | INTENTION TO DEFRAUD NOT NECESSARY TO PROVE MISREPRESENTATION IN A PASSING OFF CASE, CONFIRMS THE SUPREME COURT

Published On: 16/10/2018

Practice Area: Intellectual Property, Dispute Resolution

Authors:

V. Srinivasa Raghavan

Aditi Verma Thakur

The Supreme Court of India recently passed a judgement in Wockhardt Ltd. Vs. Torrent Pharmaceuticals & Anr., through which it reaffirmed that the intention to defraud or deceive, or mens rea, should not be considered, to analyse misrepresentation in a case of passing off. INDUSLAWâ€™s V Srinivasa Raghavan, Aditi Verma Thakur and Anju Srinivasan analyse this case and the findings of the Supreme Court.

In a watershed moment for India’s insolvency and competition law regime, the Supreme Court of India (“SC”), in Independent Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. Girish Sriram Juneja, has delivered a majorit...

Mandatory CCI Approval Before CoC Voting: A Watershed Moment for Competition and Insolvency Law in India

The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision (Asha Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh), has ruled that being declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the CrPC does not preclude the right of a per...

Supreme Court: There is no bar on seeking anticipatory bail even if the applicant is declared as a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the CrPC

Recently, the Delhi High Court in Ovington Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. Bindiya Nagar held that the court for the purpose of extension of an arbitral tribunal’s mandate is the court that appointed the arbit...

“‘Court’ For Extension of Arbitrator’s Mandate – A Legal Quandary”

The Supreme Court of India has set a crucial legal precedent, declaring the remand of an accused to police custody, despite such an accused person being granted anticipatory bail, as impermissible. Th...

INTENTION TO DEFRAUD NOT NECESSARY TO PROVE MISREPRESENTATION IN A PASSING OFF CASE, CONFIRMS THE SUPREME COURT