Article in this October 2015 issue of the IPR Amicus discusses recent Delhi High Court Judgement granting permanent injunction in the case involving patented diabetics drug. According to the author, the present judgment is one of its kind where the trial has been concluded within a period of three years, but it remains to be seen what would be its implications in the pharmaceutical sector and what outcome it will have on the interface of patents & pharma.
Under Ratio decidendi, this issue of Amicus covers judgement of the Supreme Court of India upholding interim injunction granted by the trial court on the basis of ‘first in the market’ test, in a dispute where the defendant had filed for registration of the mark six years prior to the commencement of user by the Plaintiff, but had refrained from using the mark. In another decision, the Court was of the view that copyright does not exist in the title of a work. Further, the Delhi High Court has rejected the argument that the suit is not maintainable as an unregistered licence agreement cannot be admitted as evidence of title in view of Section 69(5) of the Patents Act, 1970.
News Nuggets in this issue of IPR Amicus brings to readers a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit opining that the ‘Sequence’ of yoga poses and breathing exercises were not entitled to copyright protection. Further, the UK government, after conducting a review of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (the CPRs) has decided that it will not exercise the option to empower business with civil injunctive power.
