Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)
Documents citing Coca Cola Export Corpn. vs Income Tax Officer Coca Cola Export ... on 20 November, 1998

Fourts (India) Laboratories Limited vs Gufic Private Limited on 28 October, 2002

12. The rules of comparison of the marks have been enunciated by Justice Parker in Pianotist application case: "You must take the two words. You must Judge of them, both by their look and by their sound. You must consider the goods to which they are to be applied. You must consider the nature and kind of customer who would be likely to buy those goods. In fact, you must consider all the surrounding circumstances; and you must further consider what is likely to happen if each of those trade marks is used in a normal way as a trade mark for the goods of the respective owners of the marks. If, considering all those circumstances, you come to the conclusion that there will be confusion- that is to say, not necessarily that one man will be injured and the other will gain illicit benefit, but that there will be confusion in the mind of the public which will lead to confusion in the goods - then you may refuse the registration, or rather you must refuse the registration in that case."
Trademark Tribunal Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

B. Rosaiah vs F. Hoffman La Roche Ag on 21 January, 2002

10. Amrithdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo, AIR 1963 SC 449 at 452 : PTC (Suppl)(2) 1(SC); Coca-Cola Co. v. Pepsi-Cola, (1942) 59 RPC 127 at 133. It is well settled that in deciding the question of similarity between two marks, the marks have to be considered as wholes when comparing two words, it is not right to take a part of the word and compare it with a part of the other word ; one word must be considered as a whole and compared with the other word as a whole. In William bailey (Birmigham) Ltd. 's Appln., (1935) RPC 136. Farwill Justice said "I do not think it is a right to take part of the word and compare it with a part of the other word, one word must be considered as a whole and compared with the other word as a whole. I think it is dangerous method to adopt to dilute the word up and seek to distinguish a portion of it from a portion of the other word." "The true test", as observed by Sargant, J. "is whether the totality of the proposed trade mark is such that it is likely to cause mis-lake or deception, or confusion, in the minds of persons accustomed to the existing trade mark."
Trademark Tribunal Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1