The Delhi High Court recently directed the customs authorities at Mundra port to inspect whether certain imported Chinese dental hygiene products lying at the port were packaged in a trade dress that was deceptively similar to products sold by Colgate [Colgate Palmolive Co Vs John Doe & Ors].
Colgate-Palmolive has alleged that these Chinese toothbrushes and toothpastes, to be sold under the brand name "Doctor Good", were packaged in a way that copied Colgate's trademark blue and red packaging.
Colgate moved the Court on receiving information that such "Doctor Good" toothbrushes were being transported from China to India for sale.
It urged the High Court to permanently restrain the makers of the Chinese goods from carrying on such trademark infringement.
Colgate also placed on record images of the "Doctor Good" products, packaged in a red and blue trade dress.
On September 17, the High Court Bench of Justice Tejas Karia compared the pictures of the products and observed that prima facie, the trade dress of the Chinese goods was deceptively similar to Colgate’s products.
Further, the Court observed that the product category, trade channel and consumer base of Colgate's products and "Doctor Good" products is identical.
The Court opined that if Doctor Good is allowed to adopt a trade dress that is similar to that of Colgate's, it could dilute Colgate's reputation.
“The Plaintiff has garnered significant goodwill and reputation for its products under the Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, such that it is associated with the Plaintiff by the members of the trade and public. Therefore, any adoption of an identical or deceptively similar Trade Dress is likely to cause dilution of the Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation,” the Court stated.
However, the judge added that he cannot pass an injunction order until it is confirmed that these were the products that were imported and lying with the customs authorities.
“However, at this stage, it is not possible to grant any interim injunction for restraining the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from using the Impugned Trade Dress without ascertaining the presence of the products bearing the Impugned Trade Dress in the boxes marked as ‘ASB026’ and ‘ASB027’ in Container No. IAAU1891912,” the Court said.
Therefore, the Court ordered the Customs authorities to open two boxes lying at their warehouse, which allegedly carry these trademark-infringing Chinese products and inspect the same in the presence of two Colgate representatives. These boxes are to be detained or kept at the Customs warehouse until further orders, the Court added.
The authority was also asked to file a report before the Court on its findings.
"Defendant No.3 shall file a Report before this Court within two weeks of seizure of the boxes marked as ‘ASB026’ and ‘ASB027’ in Container No. IAAU1891912, annexing the photographs, description, quantity, country of origin and other particulars as deemed relevant to the identity of the goods, in addition to the details of the exporter and consignee, in a sealed envelope. The boxes mentioned in the Report shall be detained / stored in Customs bonded warehouse until further orders," it ordered.
The next date of hearing is October 29.
Senior Advocate Swathi Sukumar with Advocates Rishabh Gupta, Arpit Singh and Shruti Manchanda appeared for Colgate.
[Read order]