- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Delhi High Court Rules in Favour of Sun Pharma; Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs in Trademark Case
Delhi High Court Rules in Favour of Sun Pharma; Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs in Trademark Case
The Delhi High Court has awarded Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited, a pharmaceutical company, with costs totaling ₹5 lakh in a legal matter pertaining to trademark infringement.
The litigation concerned their trademark "Oxiplat," which was inspired by one of their medicinal formulations. The term "Oxiplat" was coined by Sun Pharmaceuticals in 2001 and has been applied to a medication known as Oxaliplatin, used in the treatment of cancer.
The proceedings were overseen by Justice Prathiba M Singh, who presided over the lawsuit initiated by Sun Pharma against two fellow pharmaceutical companies for the registration of the "Soxplat" mark in 2014. The defendants ultimately relinquished the use of the "Soxplat" mark and confirmed their commitment to refrain from using any comparable name.
Taking note of the absence of an interim injunction against the defendants throughout the ongoing litigation, the Court determined, considering the prevailing conditions, to grant Sun Pharma costs amounting to ₹5 lakh, which is to be settled within eight weeks.