IP Case Law › Trade Marks › L'Oreal India Private Limited v. Shanaz Bariz
Relevant Acts and provisions
Provisions considered: Trade Marks Act, 1999 (disparagement); Order XXXIX, CPC
Brief facts
L'Oreal sued over a video circulated on social media that it alleged disparaged its L'OREAL and MAYBELLINE trade marks and products.
Free to read once you are signed in
Read the rest of this case note
The findings, the decision and the principle the court settled on are below. Create a free account to keep reading. No payment, and nothing to cancel.
Already have an account? Sign in
We use your details to give you access and to contact you about your enquiry. See our privacy policy.
Keywords
AI-generated Content Disparagement Ex Parte Injunction MAYBELLINE Social Media Video
Read the judgment
More Trade Marks judgments
Trade Marks
Abhimanyu Prakash & Ors. v. Ferrero S.p.A. & Ors.
Seized infringing articles bearing an imitation of a protected trade dress should be destroyed rather than released for other use.
AppealCounterfeit GoodsDestruction of Seized GoodsJar ShapeTrade MarksAcqua Minerals Limited v. Pramod Borse & Anr.
Registration of a domain name identical or deceptively similar to another's well-known trade mark, by a person having no legitimate connection with that mark and who seeks to profit from its transfer, amounts to bad faith cybersqu…
Bad Faith AdoptionCybersquattingDomain NamesPassing OffTrade MarksADS Spirits Pvt. Ltd. v. The Registrar of Trade Marks
Section 9(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 proscribes registration only where a mark is devoid of distinctive character, that is, incapable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of another; it does not…
Absolute Grounds for RefusalArbitrary MarkDistinctivenessNon-speaking Order