<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (7) TMI 1640 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288803</link>
    <description>Territorial jurisdiction in internet-based trademark disputes arises where a defendant&#039;s website and social-media outreach go beyond mere accessibility by offering services, soliciting customers, facilitating online payments, and prima facie targeting the forum territory. A well-known trademark receives protection beyond its registered class where use of a deceptively similar mark in a corporate name or trading style is likely to cause confusion; descriptive additions and claims of different services may not avoid infringement. Admissions of prior adoption, use, registrations, and other material facts can support summary disposal and judgment on admissions where remaining objections disclose no plausible defence. Injunctive relief was granted, with costs, while remaining prayers were declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:34:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=616251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1640 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288803</link>
      <description>Territorial jurisdiction in internet-based trademark disputes arises where a defendant&#039;s website and social-media outreach go beyond mere accessibility by offering services, soliciting customers, facilitating online payments, and prima facie targeting the forum territory. A well-known trademark receives protection beyond its registered class where use of a deceptively similar mark in a corporate name or trading style is likely to cause confusion; descriptive additions and claims of different services may not avoid infringement. Admissions of prior adoption, use, registrations, and other material facts can support summary disposal and judgment on admissions where remaining objections disclose no plausible defence. Injunctive relief was granted, with costs, while remaining prayers were declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>