SC: Bribe Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt without Proof of Demand under PC Act  ||  SC: Cut Power, Water to Bulk Waste Generators Violating Solid Waste Rules  ||  SC: RPF Employee Who Conceals Criminal Case Can be Discharged at Any Stage  ||  SC: Police can Register FIR Despite Magistrate Rejecting S.156(3) CrPC Application  ||  SC: Criminal Acquittal Alone Cannot Prove Absence of Negligence in Accident Claims  ||  SC: Referral Fees Earned By Auto Dealers for Bank, Insurance Promotion Taxable as Service Tax  ||  Supreme Court Revisits the definition of “Industry”: 9-Judge Bench Reformulates the 1978 Triple Test  ||  Delhi HC: Exam Integrity is a Shared Duty of Candidates and Authorities  ||  Delhi High Court: POCSO Allows Child Witness Cross-Examination but Bars Aggressive Questioning  ||  Kerala HC: Christian Women May File Divorce Pleas Where They Reside    

Faber-Castell Aktiengesellschaft and Ors. v. Cello Pens Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. - (High Court of Bombay) (03 Sep 2015)

Cello’s crayon packaging ‘passing off’ for Faber-Castell

MANU/MH/2373/2015

Intellectual Property Rights

The Court accepted Faber-Castell’s submissions that Cello’s packaging of its crayons in two recessed trays facing each other and set in a larger outer container was indistinguishable from its own. It noted that though the design of the crayons was in the public domain, the arrangement of elements of shape, aesthetics and finish by Cello were more than merely coincidental. With regard to the high possibility of buyers being confused between the competing products and the continuing loss to Faber-Castell, Cello was restrained from manufacturing or selling the infringing products.

Relevant : M/s. Smithkline Beecham Plc. & Ors. v M/s. Hindustan Lever Limited & Ors., MANU/DE/1054/1999 Whirlpool of India Ltd. v Videocon Industries Ltd. MANU/MH/1174/2012 Gorbatschow Wodka K.G. vs. John Distilleries Limited MANU/MH/0630/2011

Tags : IPR   CRAYON   PASSING OFF   PACKAGING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved