The Bombay High Court, in proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has restrained a former franchisee from using “KIDZEE”, “KIDGEE” or any deceptively or phonetically similar name after the expiry of her franchise agreement with Zee Learn Limited. The Court held that regulatory permission to operate a school under a…

In the landmark judgment Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the Supreme Court made clear that the state cannot intrude into personal privacy without meeting a three-part test. The intrusion must have a valid legal basis, pursue a legitimate state aim, and be proportionate to that purpose. In other words, the state can access…

The Delhi High Court, in a recent judgment of its Division Bench, considered the interplay between prior use, descriptive marks, third-party use, deceptive similarity, and limitation in a passing-off dispute concerning the marks HASLAB’S DIGESTO and DIGESTO PLUS. The appeal was preferred by Hahnemann Scientific Laboratory India Pvt. Ltd. against the order of the District…

India’s revised film-certification guidelines largely preserve the existing certification framework, but one change is likely to matter in practice: scenes involving narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances must now carry a prescribed statutory warning. For filmmakers and producers, the point is not merely editorial. Drug-related scenes may now require early compliance review during scripting, editing and…