Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal, Holds Investigating Officer Cannot Create Evidence  ||  Supreme Court: NDPS Prosecution Cannot Be Quashed Solely Over Co-Accused’s Disclosure  ||  SC: Tax Classification Depends on Goods' Form at Sale, not their End Use  ||  Delhi High Court: No Material Showing Delhi Police Compromised the 2020 Riots Probe  ||  Madras HC Suggests Mandatory Attachment of Properties Suspected to Be Proceeds of Corruption  ||  P&H High Court: Demolition After Lawyer Flagged Corruption Appears Aimed at Silencing Him  ||  Calcutta High Court: Contempt Proceedings Cannot Be Used to Challenge Orders or Attack Judges  ||  Orissa High Court: Marriage Need Not Be Preserved When the Relationship Has Substantially Eroded  ||  SC: CIRP Can Continue Despite Fraudulent Insolvency Plea That Triggered It  ||  Delhi HC: Senior Citizen May Seek Eviction of Daughter-in-Law for Ill-Treatment    

Federal Brands Ltd. v. Levi Strauss India Pvt. Ltd. - (High Court of Bombay) (02 Mar 2016)

Levi Strauss denied use of ‘Live In’ for promotional material

MANU/MH/0340/2016

Intellectual Property Rights

The Bombay High Court prohibited Levi Strauss from using the words ‘Live In’ in connection with its clothing line, ‘Levi’s’.

The Plaintiff, owner of the registered trade mark, ‘Live-In’ had complained against Levi Strauss using the deceptively similar phrase ‘Live In’ alongside its own trade mark, ‘Levi’s’. The Court accepted its contentions that the public would associate ‘Live-In’ and ‘Levi’s’ together and confusion would result in both being accepted as brands belonging to Levi Strauss. Counter arguments by on behalf of Strauss that the words were only generally descriptive of clothing, and formed mere sub-text in its branding backfired somewhat. The Court concluded that if the words were of such little importance, Levi Strauss would not be prejudiced if it were not allowed to use the same in hoardings and other advertising campaigns.

Relevant : M/s. Johnson and Johnson and another vs. Christine Hoden India (P.) Ltd. and another MANU/DE/0675/1987 Hem Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Trading vs. ITC Limited MANU/MH/0535/2012 Section 29 Trade Marks Act, 1999

Tags : LEVI STRAUSS   LIVE IN   TRADE MARK   DECEPTIVE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved