https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196933 A mark that is visually, structurally and phonetically close to a registered trade mark for identical goods is said to infringe where deceptive similarity and likelihood of confusion are shown, particularly if the essential feature of the earlier mark is adopted and goodwill is likely to be exploited. The text also notes that punitive damages may be justified despite no proof of actual loss when adoption of the confusing mark appears deliberate and deterrence against dishonest trade practices is needed. en-us Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:29:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196933 A mark that is visually, structurally and phonetically close to a registered trade mark for identical goods is said to infringe where deceptive similarity and likelihood of confusion are shown, particularly if the essential feature of the earlier mark is adopted and goodwill is likely to be exploited. The text also notes that punitive damages may be justified despite no proof of actual loss when adoption of the confusing mark appears deliberate and deterrence against dishonest trade practices is needed. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196933