Sanofi is a globally well-established name in the field of healthcare pharmaceuticals, primarily in Europe. It filed a suit for permanent injunction against one 'Snofinn' at the Delhi High Court in the case of of Sanofi & Anr. v. Faisal Mushtaq & Ors. CS (COMM) 929/2018 & I.A. No. 7820/2018. It stated that the defendant's trade name "Snofinn" and its logo, were deceptively similar to that of Sanofi's. In our opinion, the similarity was shamelessly deceptive. (Since a picture speaks a thousand words, we shall 'show' you the similarity instead of saying much):

* Pic Courtesy: The judgment itself contained this simple depiction of the deceptive similarity!

The defendant, inter alia, operated a domain name www.snofinn.com which stated that the defendant was engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical preparations under its brand name "Snofinn". The defendant had applied for a trademark registration for the trade name and logo. However, the same was opposed by Sanofi.

In this suit, the Court concluded (as we all have!) that a case of trade mark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off was made out. It further stated that the triple identity test i.e.-identical trademark-identical goods- identical trade channel- has been satisfied.

It noted that the defendants were not appearing in the matter and that Sanofi's contentions were satisfactory enough to establish a case of infringement. The court decreed the suit summarily (meaning- without recording evidence) in favour of the Sanofi, ordering exemplary costs which included the lawyer's fees as well as Court fees.

The Court's speedy and conclusive disposal of the case in less than a year's time is noteworthy.

Compiled by: Adv. Sachi Kapoor | Concept & Edited by: Dr. Mohan Dewan

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.