Article in June 2020 issue of IPR Amicus discusses elaborately the recent decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Monsanto Holdings Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. Competition Commission of India and Ors.

The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses an IPAB decision wherein the Appellate Board has set aside the revocation order which was a result of post-grant opposition proceedings.

Considering the situation of shortage of drugs and other resources to combat Covid-19, India and South Africa have jointly requested for a TRIPS waiver.

Comparative advertisement may often lead to a legal tussle under the Indian Trademark Law. The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses elaborately the recent decision of the Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in Hindustan Unilever Limited and Another v. USV Private Limited which has since been upheld by the Division Bench and maintained by the Supreme Court.

A registered proprietor of a trademark is required to remain cautious with respect to misuse of the trademark by others, failing which the registered proprietor may be disentitled from taking any legal action against the alleged offenders.

The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses elaborately a recent decision of the Delhi High Court on the question as to whether the communication of a sound recording to the public also amounts to communication of the literary and musical works embodied in the sound recording to the public.

The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses at length the recent decision of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (‘IPAB’) in the case of Wisig Networks Private Limited v. Controller.

The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses elaborately, the recent decision of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board reaffirming the importance of the principles of natural justice in judicial and/or quasi-judicial decisions, whilst also clarifying aspects of patent law with respect to cited prior art documents and description of the invention.

Elaborately discussing various IPAB Orders, including the 2011 decision in the case of LG Electronics and the very recent decision in the case of Esco Corporation, the article in this issue of IPR Amicus examines several issues involving divisional applications.

The article in this issue of IPR Amicus elaborately discusses a recent decision of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (‘IPAB’) wherein the IPAB allowed the appeal challenging the revocation of Indian Patent No. 262968 by the Joint Controller following post-grant opposition proceedings.