india-istock-182157035-ericsphotography-
ericsphotography / iStockphoto.com
21 November 2018Asia-Pacific

Indian court rules in Sanofi’s favour in trademark suit

The Delhi High Court has ruled against a company for its ‘near identical’ imitation of pharmaceutical company Sanofi’s name and trademarks.

In a decision handed down on Friday, November 16, the court said the defendants, named in the judgment as Faisal Mushtaq & Ors, are liable for trademark infringement, passing off and copyright infringement.

The same court had already imposed an interim injunction against the defendants in May this year, but the latest decision grants full summary judgment in favour of Sanofi.

According to the judgment, the defendants had been calling themselves ‘Snofinn’ and had adopted a visually similar logo to Sanofi. They also operated a website under the domain www.snofinn.com.

Sanofi first began using the trademark ‘Sanofi’ in 1980, along with a trademark covering its logo, a circle composed of one blue, one green and one brown segment.

The logo used by Snofinn was visually similar, with the only difference being that a green segment replaced the brown coloured segment.

According to Sanofi, the pharmaceutical company first came across the www.snofinn.com website in December last year. On the site, the defendants were using the “nearly identical” trademark ‘Snofinn’ and trade name Snofinn Pharmaceuticals.

Snofinn also marketed itself under the tagline “A universal healthcare provider focused on patients’ needs”, which Sanofi’s lawyers argued was confusingly similar to its own tagline, “A global healthcare leader focused on patients’ needs”.

Despite sending a cease-and-desist letter and an email later that month the defendants failed to act, Sanofi claimed.

The court concluded that Sanofi had made out a case of trademark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off , before adding that the defendants have “no real prospect of defending the claim”.

“The triple identity test is satisfied as the defendant has made use of identical trademark and trade name in relation to identical products (pharmaceutical goods and research) having an identical trade channel (patients and those in need of pharmaceutical products),” said the court.

Faisal Mushtaq & Ors have been ordered to pay costs including attorneys’ fees and court fees, although the judgment does not specify an exact amount.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.


More on this story

Big Pharma
7 January 2019   India’s Department of Pharmaceuticals has removed a price cap from a range of essential patented drugs used in the treatment of rare diseases.

More on this story

Big Pharma
7 January 2019   India’s Department of Pharmaceuticals has removed a price cap from a range of essential patented drugs used in the treatment of rare diseases.