A Win Over The Battle Of Trademark Infringement By Registered Mark Dealing Under A Different Class

The Delhi High Court in the matter of L’AIR Liquid Societe Anonyme Pour I Etude Et I Exploitation Des proceeded Georges Claude And Anr. v. M/S Liquid AIR & Ors. reaffirmed that even if a registered trademark is used as a business name or trading style, it will constitute infringement under section 29(5) of the Trademarks Act. This decision came in the suit filed by a French company(represented by Khurana & Khurana Advocates and IP Attorneys) claiming their rights to the trademark ‘AIR LIQUIDE’, which is claimed to be commercially used by them in more than 60 countries in the world since 1902. The grievance of the plaintiffs was that the defendants were using the domain name “www.liquidair.in” along with the mark ‘LIQUID AIR’ as their trade name, which is deceptively similar to their mark. The noteworthy aspect of this judgment is that the Hon’ble High Court opined in favor of the plaintiffs despite both the parties being in different classes. The plaintiffs in the instant case are one of the leading manufacturers of industrial gases in the world, having commenced its business in 1902 and operate under classes 1,6, 10 and 11, whereas the defendants operate in class 39, being the distributors of industrial gases. The Hon’ble High Court was of the view that the business of both the parties in the present case is essentially connected or affiliated to each other and there is a strong likelihood that potential consumers may be misleading owing to the deceptive similarity between the two trademarks in question.

The plaintiff sought an injunction on the ground that the marks used by defendants are identical/deceptively similar and they were involved in the same business of trading and marketing of gas-related products as that of the plaintiff. The Delhi High Court on 9th May 2018 passed an ex-parte ad-interim order of injunction restraining the defendants from dealing, directly or indirectly, in any goods/services similar to the goods/services of the plaintiff under the trademark ‘LIQUID AIR’ or any other mark deceptively similar to plaintiffs trademark “AIR LIQUIDE” and from using the domain name “www.liquidair.in” or any other domain name comprised of the term Liquid Air or any term similar to “AIR LIQUIDE”, to the plaintiffs.

Against the court’s ex-parte order, the defendants moved an application for vacation of the interim injunction and took the plea that their firm was registered in 1995 with the Registrar of Firms. Further, they said that they are involved in the trading of gas products and not in the manufacturing of gases. They also averred that they were the members of the All India Industrial Gas Manufacturers Association (AIIGMA) from 2002 till 2012. The plaintiffs took the plea that they are registered proprietors of the mark ‘AIR LIQUIDE’ and the use by the Defendants would constitute an infringement and pass off.

The Delhi High Court after listening to the arguments and counterarguments from both the parties opined that the use of the trademark “LIQUID AIR” by the defendants in class 39 does constitute infringement. Further, the Hon’ble High Court opined that the defendants’ intended use of the impugned mark although in a class different but essentially allied to the plaintiffs’ business constitutes infringement and incontrovertibly contravenes the intellectual property rights of the plaintiffs and therefore, the defendant cannot under any circumstances be allowed to continue the use of the impugned mark. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that:-

  • The defendant would not adopt any mark or name which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s mark “AIR LIQUIDE”. Also, the court directed the defendants to change the firm name “LIQUID AIR” w.e.f. 1st April 2019, subject to the plaintiffs giving up the claim for damages.
  • The Defendant shall obtain the requisite approvals from the Registrar of Firms or any other authority including the registrar of Companies.
  • The Defendants must surrender the domain name “liquidair.in” and would not use it for any of their business activities in the future. Also, the Defendants cannot adopt any other domain name or website name which contains any mark or name identical or deceptively similar to the mark ‘AIR LIQUIDE’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

7 + six =

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010