Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court

High Court Grants Red Bull AG Injunction Against "SEVEN HOURS," Says "Chances of Confusion are Very High"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has granted Red Bull AG, the Swiss energy drink company, an injunction against Rohidas Popat Kapadnis & ANR., the manufacturers of 'SEVEN HOURS' energy drinks. The court cited that the "chances of confusion are very high," particularly in online platforms.

Justice Prathiba M. Singh observed that the silver and blue color combination used by the Defendants for their energy drink cans is identical to that of Red Bull. The Court said, "the colour combination of blue and silver is enjoying statutory protection in favor of the Plaintiff."

Red Bull AG, which had sales of over Rs. 180 crores in India in 2022 and holds a market share of 44.2% in the energy drink segment, filed the suit stating the Defendants had copied their distinctive blue and silver color scheme. "The balance of convenience lies in favor of the Plaintiff, and irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiff if the interim injunction is not granted," the Court noted in its ruling.

The Court also appointed a Local Commissioner to seize the infringing products. However, filled cans already manufactured by the Defendants will be allowed to be sold off, but no new products in the disputed packaging will be allowed to be manufactured.

This is not the first time Red Bull AG has sought legal protection for its trademark color combination. The company has previously secured similar orders protecting its blue and silver color scheme.

As per the Court's directive, the Defendants have been instructed to deposit Rs. 3 lakhs with the Registrar General of the Court.

Date of Decision: October 16, 2023

RED BULL AG vs ROHIDAS POPAT KAPADNIS & ANR.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/16-Oct-2023-Redbull-DelHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News