{"id":25652,"date":"2026-06-13T12:04:55","date_gmt":"2026-06-13T12:04:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=25652"},"modified":"2026-06-13T12:10:28","modified_gmt":"2026-06-13T12:10:28","slug":"trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/","title":{"rendered":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 id=\"h-introduction\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In a world increasingly connected by trade, travel, and digital media, a foreign brand may become well known in a country even before it physically arrives there. But does that familiarity alone give the foreign brand legal protection against a domestic rival who has been selling under the same name for years?<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_85 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Factual_And_Procedural_Background\" >Factual And Procedural Background<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Robert_A_Merry_And_Co_Ltd\" >Robert A. Merry And Co. Ltd.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Piccadily_Agro_Industries_Ltd\" >Piccadily Agro Industries Ltd.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Litigation_History\" >Litigation History<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Key_Parties_At_A_Glance\" >Key Parties At A Glance<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#The_Dispute\" >The Dispute<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Irish_Company_Contentions\" >Irish Company Contentions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Indian_Company_Contentions\" >Indian Company Contentions<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Core_Issues_Before_The_Court\" >Core Issues Before The Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Reasoning_And_Analysis_Of_The_Court\" >Reasoning And Analysis Of The Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Passing_Off_Legal_Framework\" >Passing Off: Legal Framework<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Territoriality_Principle_Versus_Universality_Doctrine\" >Territoriality Principle Versus Universality Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#NR_Dongre_v_Whirlpool\" >N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Milmet_Oftho_Industries_v_Allergan\" >Milmet Oftho Industries v. Allergan<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Toyota_Jidosha_Prius_Landmark_Ruling\" >Toyota Jidosha (Prius) Landmark Ruling<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#BPI_Sports_LLC_v_Saurabh_Gulati\" >BPI Sports LLC v. Saurabh Gulati<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#VIP_Industries_Limited_v_Carlton_Shoes_Limited\" >VIP Industries Limited v. Carlton Shoes Limited<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Sumit_Vijay_v_Major_League_Baseball_Properties_Inc\" >Sumit Vijay v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-20\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Courts_Evaluation_Of_Evidence_Filed_By_The_Irish_Company\" >Court&#8217;s Evaluation Of Evidence Filed By The Irish Company<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-21\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Advertising_Ban_Argument_Rejected\" >Advertising Ban Argument Rejected<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-22\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Absence_Of_Indian_Registration_And_Market_Presence\" >Absence Of Indian Registration And Market Presence<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-23\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Indian_Companys_Trademark_Infringement_Claim\" >Indian Company&#8217;s Trademark Infringement Claim<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-24\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Statutory_Provisions_Applied\" >Statutory Provisions Applied<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-25\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Comparison_Of_The_Marks\" >Comparison Of The Marks<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-26\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Confusion_And_Consumer_Perception\" >Confusion And Consumer Perception<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-27\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Rejection_Of_Product_Difference_Argument\" >Rejection Of Product Difference Argument<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-28\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Balance_Of_Convenience_And_Interim_Relief\" >Balance Of Convenience And Interim Relief<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-29\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Final_Decision_of_the_Court\" >Final Decision of the Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-30\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Point_of_Law_Settled\" >Point of Law Settled<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-31\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#What_Does_Not_Establish_Transborder_Reputation\" >What Does Not Establish Transborder Reputation?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-32\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Trademark_Infringement_Under_the_Trade_Marks_Act_1999\" >Trademark Infringement Under the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-33\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Principle_of_Consistency_in_Trademark_Litigation\" >Principle of Consistency in Trademark Litigation<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-34\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Key_Legal_Principles_Emerging_from_the_Judgment\" >Key Legal Principles Emerging from the Judgment<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-35\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#Case_Details\" >Case Details<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is precisely the question that came before the <strong>High Court of Delhi<\/strong> in a landmark trademark dispute between an Irish whiskey maker and an Indian distillery, both claiming rights over the name <strong>&#8220;WHISTLER&#8221;<\/strong> for their respective whiskey products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judgment, delivered on 29th May 2026, offers a rigorous and illuminating analysis of the law of passing off, trademark infringement, and the doctrine of trans border reputation and Territoriality of Goodwill as it applies in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It is a judgment that every brand owner, domestic or foreign, seeking to enter or protect a position in the Indian market must carefully study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-factual-and-procedural-background\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Factual_And_Procedural_Background\"><\/span>Factual And Procedural Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-robert-a-merry-and-co-ltd\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Robert_A_Merry_And_Co_Ltd\"><\/span>Robert A. Merry And Co. Ltd.<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Robert A. Merry and Co. Ltd. is a Private Limited Company incorporated under Irish Company Law. It has been engaged in the manufacture, production, and trading of Irish whiskey, gin, and other alcohol-based drinks for more than two decades and describes itself as an industry leader.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The company claims that the trademark WHISTLER was first registered on 12th May 2005 in the United Kingdom and was later assigned to its sister concern, Boann Distillery Limited, in 2015, before being transferred to the company itself in 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The mark THE WHISTLER was adopted in 2016 and the company obtained registrations for one or both marks in several countries including the Russian Federation, Chile, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, Brazil, and Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">However, and this is a fact of central importance in the entire dispute, the company does not hold any trademark registration in India for either of the two marks WHISTLER or THE WHISTLER.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The company claims an impressive global market presence spanning Asian countries including China, India, and Japan, European countries, North and South America, the United Kingdom, and parts of Africa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It registered several domain names incorporating the words WHISTLER and THE WHISTLER.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It also claims substantial global revenues from as early as 2011-12 reaching over Rs. 224 crore in 2023-24.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The company won several awards including:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>World&#8217;s Best Honey at the World Liqueur Awards in 2020<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>World&#8217;s Best Grain at a prestigious whiskey event in 2022<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A number of established Indian liquor distributors including:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Radico Khaitan<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Oberoi Spirits<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Globus Spirits<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">reportedly approached the company between 2014 and 2025 to market and sell its products in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-piccadily-agro-industries-ltd\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Piccadily_Agro_Industries_Ltd\"><\/span>Piccadily Agro Industries Ltd.<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Piccadily Agro Industries Ltd. is a listed Public Limited Company incorporated in 1994 and is described as India&#8217;s premier independent producer and distributor of malt spirits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Its portfolio includes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Single malt whiskey<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Blended malt whiskies<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Rum<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vodka<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Other alcoholic beverages<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The company is also the maker of the celebrated Indian single malt brand INDRI, which became the first single malt brand in the world to cross sales of one lakh cases in 2023-24 and commands 35 percent of export market share from India in its category with presence in 27 countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In 2007, Piccadily conceived the trademark WHISTLER and in April 2008 filed an application for registration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The company says the brand draws inspiration from the Whistler Warbler, a vibrant song bird indigenous to the Indian sub-continent known for its rich and melodic whistling songs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The mark was registered and the company spent nearly a decade developing the product before commercially launching the whiskey under the WHISTLER brand in 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The whiskey became a success upon launch and was relaunched in 2025 with a varied blend and new packaging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The product received excise approvals in more than 15 states including:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Delhi<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Uttar Pradesh<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Goa<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Rajasthan<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">and is priced in the range of Rs. 980 to Rs. 1500 for a 750 ml pack.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-litigation-history\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Litigation_History\"><\/span>Litigation History<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In August 2025, Piccadily learned that the Irish company was attempting to market and sell its whiskey under the WHISTLER mark in India through M\/s HS Oberoi Spirits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It issued objection letters to various state excise departments in September 2025 and sent a legal notice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Irish company replied asserting its ownership of the mark globally and on the very same day, 27th October 2025, filed CS (COMM) 1164\/2025 before the High Court of Delhi seeking a permanent injunction restraining Piccadily from selling its IMFL whiskey under the mark WHISTLER, alleging passing off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Piccadily in turn filed CS (COMM) 9\/2026 seeking a permanent injunction against the Irish company for infringement of its registered trademark WHISTLER in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Both parties also filed applications for ad interim injunctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court took up both applications together and disposed them by a single judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-key-parties-at-a-glance\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Parties_At_A_Glance\"><\/span>Key Parties At A Glance<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Particulars<\/th><th>Robert A. Merry And Co. Ltd.<\/th><th>Piccadily Agro Industries Ltd.<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Country<\/td><td>Ireland<\/td><td>India<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Trademark Claimed<\/td><td>WHISTLER \/ THE WHISTLER<\/td><td>WHISTLER<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>First Registration Claimed<\/td><td>United Kingdom (2005)<\/td><td>India (Application in 2008)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Indian Trademark Registration<\/td><td>No<\/td><td>Yes<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Commercial Launch In India<\/td><td>Attempted Entry Later<\/td><td>2018<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Nature Of Claim<\/td><td>Passing Off Based On Global Reputation<\/td><td>Trademark Infringement And Passing Off<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-the-dispute\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Dispute\"><\/span>The Dispute<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The dispute in its simplest form is this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Two companies are using or seeking to use the trademark WHISTLER for whiskey in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Irish company registered the mark internationally first, in 2005, but has no Indian registration and has only recently attempted physical entry into the Indian market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Indian company registered the mark in India in 2008, launched the product commercially in 2018, has been selling it successfully ever since, and possesses extensive documentary evidence of Indian sales, promotions, and recognition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-irish-company-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Irish_Company_Contentions\"><\/span>Irish Company Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Irish company sued for passing off, arguing that its global reputation and goodwill in the WHISTLER brand had spilled over into India, and that the Indian company was misrepresenting its product as originating from or being associated with the Irish company, thereby causing damage to its reputation and goodwill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Irish company also resisted the infringement claim made by the Indian company, arguing that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The products cater to entirely different consumer segments.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Irish whiskey retails at Rs. 2800 to Rs. 11,000 per bottle.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Indian product retails at an average of Rs. 780 per bottle.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Discerning whiskey consumers would never confuse the two products.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Irish whiskey is an EU Geographical Indication protected product clearly labelled as Irish whiskey.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-indian-company-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Indian_Company_Contentions\"><\/span>Indian Company Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Indian company on its part claimed infringement of its registered trademark WHISTLER by the Irish company and also claimed passing off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It argued that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>It has an unchallenged Indian registration from 2008.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It was first in the Indian market in 2018.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Irish company had no presence or reputation in India when the Indian product was launched.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The near-identical marks used for the same product category namely whiskey would inevitably cause confusion among consumers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-core-issues-before-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Core_Issues_Before_The_Court\"><\/span>Core Issues Before The Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Whether the Irish company possessed sufficient trans border reputation and goodwill in India to sustain a passing off action.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether the Indian company&#8217;s use of the mark WHISTLER amounted to passing off of the Irish company&#8217;s goods.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether the Irish company&#8217;s proposed use of WHISTLER in India infringed the Indian company&#8217;s registered trademark.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether the differences in pricing, packaging, consumer profile, and product positioning eliminated the likelihood of confusion.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>How the doctrines of trans border reputation and territoriality of goodwill should be applied in India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-reasoning-and-analysis-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Reasoning_And_Analysis_Of_The_Court\"><\/span>Reasoning And Analysis Of The Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court began by addressing the legal framework applicable to both sets of claims, providing a thorough and scholarly analysis of the governing principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-passing-off-legal-framework\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Passing_Off_Legal_Framework\"><\/span>Passing Off: Legal Framework<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On the question of passing off, the court noted that in the absence of any trademark registration in India, the Irish company could only assert common law rights by establishing the three classic ingredients of a passing off action as described by Lord Oliver in <em>Reckitt and Colman Products Ltd. v. Borden Inc and Ors<\/em>, MANU\/UKHL\/0012\/1990, namely goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage to goodwill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court of India had endorsed this classical trinity in <em>Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah and Another<\/em>, (2002) 3 SCC 65. Registration merely recognises rights pre-existing in common law and does not create new rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-territoriality-principle-versus-universality-doctrine\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Territoriality_Principle_Versus_Universality_Doctrine\"><\/span>Territoriality Principle Versus Universality Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The critical question, however, was whether the Irish company could establish goodwill in India sufficient to sustain a passing off claim. This brought the court to the most important legal issue in the case, namely the territoriality principle versus the universality doctrine in trademark law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court reviewed the evolution of this legal position through a series of landmark Supreme Court decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Case<\/th><th>Citation<\/th><th>Principle Established<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>N.R. Dongre and Others v. Whirlpool Corporation and Another<\/td><td>(1996) 5 SCC 714<\/td><td>Recognition of transborder reputation and spillover goodwill.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Milmet Oftho Industries and Others v. Allergan Inc.<\/td><td>(2004) 12 SCC 624<\/td><td>First-in-the-world-market test, particularly in pharmaceuticals.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha v. Prius Auto Industries Limited and Others<\/td><td>(2018) 2 SCC 1<\/td><td>Firm endorsement of the territoriality principle.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-n-r-dongre-v-whirlpool\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"NR_Dongre_v_Whirlpool\"><\/span>N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In <em>N.R. Dongre and Others v. Whirlpool Corporation and Another<\/em>, (1996) 5 SCC 714, the Supreme Court had upheld an injunction against an Indian company using the mark WHIRLPOOL, holding that the American corporation had the necessary transborder reputation which had spilled into India through its advertising and worldwide reputation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-milmet-oftho-industries-v-allergan\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Milmet_Oftho_Industries_v_Allergan\"><\/span>Milmet Oftho Industries v. Allergan<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In 2004, in <em>Milmet Oftho Industries and Others v. Allergan Inc.<\/em>, (2004) 12 SCC 624, the Supreme Court applied the first-in-the-world-market test, holding that a mark first used in the world market is entitled to protection in India against a subsequent adopter, though this reasoning was applied specifically in the context of pharmaceutical products given their inherently international character where doctors and medical professionals regularly access global literature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-toyota-jidosha-prius-landmark-ruling\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Toyota_Jidosha_Prius_Landmark_Ruling\"><\/span>Toyota Jidosha (Prius) Landmark Ruling<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decisive shift came with the Supreme Court&#8217;s judgment in <em>Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha v. Prius Auto Industries Limited and Others<\/em>, (2018) 2 SCC 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In this case, the Supreme Court authoritatively moved away from the universality doctrine and firmly endorsed the territoriality principle. It held that the existence of goodwill and reputation must be shown to exist in India specifically, and that global goodwill and reputation without evidence of territorial goodwill and reputation in India will not be sufficient to succeed in a claim of passing off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court in <em>Toyota Jidosha<\/em> reviewed the view of the UK Supreme Court in <em>Starbucks (HK) Ltd. v. British Sky Broadcasting Group<\/em>, (2015) 1 WLR 2628, which had held that mere reputation is not enough and that a claimant must show significant goodwill in the form of customers within the jurisdiction, as opposed to people in the jurisdiction who happen to be customers elsewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The yardstick under <em>Toyota Jidosha<\/em> for passing off became prior use in India. The Supreme Court further held that once goodwill is established in the jurisdiction, the claimant is not required to prove actual confusion and that likelihood of confusion would be a sufficient test.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-bpi-sports-llc-v-saurabh-gulati\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"BPI_Sports_LLC_v_Saurabh_Gulati\"><\/span>BPI Sports LLC v. Saurabh Gulati<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court also reviewed the Delhi High Court&#8217;s own judgment in <em>BPI Sports LLC v. Saurabh Gulati and Another<\/em>, (2023) 3 HCC (Del) 164, which drew out the following principles from <em>Toyota Jidosha<\/em>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The territoriality principle applies and not the universality doctrine.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Mere reputation is not enough.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claimant must have customers within India rather than merely people in India who are customers of the brand abroad.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claimant must be present through its mark in the territorial jurisdiction even if a real market is not necessary.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Such presence may be shown by extensive advertisements circulated and seen in India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-vip-industries-limited-v-carlton-shoes-limited\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"VIP_Industries_Limited_v_Carlton_Shoes_Limited\"><\/span>VIP Industries Limited v. Carlton Shoes Limited<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Division Bench&#8217;s decision in <em>VIP Industries Limited v. Carlton Shoes Limited and Another<\/em>, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4620, was also discussed at length.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In that case the Division Bench reaffirmed that global goodwill and reputation alone is insufficient for passing off and that existence of goodwill and reputation must be demonstrated in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court in that case had granted injunction to Carlton against VIP after finding that Carlton had priority of user in India supported by:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Sale invoices.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Revenue certificates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Articles in high-profile Indian magazines.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>VAT registrations.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Presence across multiple retail outlets in India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">None of these factors could be matched by VIP for the relevant period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-sumit-vijay-v-major-league-baseball-properties-inc\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Sumit_Vijay_v_Major_League_Baseball_Properties_Inc\"><\/span>Sumit Vijay v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc.<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Division Bench&#8217;s very recent decision in <em>Sumit Vijay and Another v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc. and Another<\/em>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 2, was also relied upon by the court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In that case the Division Bench reversed an order striking a mark from the Register, holding that acquisition of global goodwill and reputation is entirely irrelevant unless the global goodwill has percolated into India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court held:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Mere accessibility of a mark on websites in India is no evidence of transborder goodwill.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Availability of goods bearing the mark online without actual purchases from India is not sufficient.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Publication of marks in magazines globally available on the internet cannot by itself establish transborder reputation without positive evidence of readership or subscription in India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-court-s-evaluation-of-evidence-filed-by-the-irish-company\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Courts_Evaluation_Of_Evidence_Filed_By_The_Irish_Company\"><\/span>Court&#8217;s Evaluation Of Evidence Filed By The Irish Company<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Applying all these principles to the facts before it, the court conducted a detailed document-by-document analysis of what the Irish company had filed to support its transborder reputation claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Evidence Relied Upon<\/th><th>Court&#8217;s Finding<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Foreign trademark registrations<\/td><td>Irrelevant as they confer no rights in India.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Domain names<\/td><td>Two inaccessible in India; no evidence of Indian traffic.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Financial statements<\/td><td>No Indian sales; not specific to WHISTLER product.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Sales invoices<\/td><td>Mostly foreign; one Indian pro forma invoice dated 2 May 2025.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Social media material<\/td><td>No India-specific engagement or viewership data.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Journal references<\/td><td>Mostly post-2021 and foreign-market focused.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Awards<\/td><td>No connection with India.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Emails<\/td><td>Mostly did not mention WHISTLER; others discussed future entry into India.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Excise approvals<\/td><td>Obtained only in 2026, undermining claim of pre-2018 reputation.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Import documents<\/td><td>Pertained to 2025 and not prior use in India.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court therefore found that the Irish company had prima facie failed to demonstrate spillover of transborder reputation and goodwill in India prior to the Indian company&#8217;s commercial launch of Whistler whiskey in 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court noted that it is not enough to show that people in India were customers of the Irish company when they travelled abroad, but what is required is to demonstrate the presence of the mark within Indian boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-advertising-ban-argument-rejected\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Advertising_Ban_Argument_Rejected\"><\/span>Advertising Ban Argument Rejected<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court also rejected the argument that the advertising ban on liquor in India should excuse the Irish company from producing evidence of spillover reputation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">While acknowledging that liquor is a regulated industry where direct advertisement is restricted, the court pointed out that several brands have successfully established reputation in India through other means such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Events.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Sponsorships.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Actual sales.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Trade channels.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">None of the documents established spillover reputation prior to 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-absence-of-indian-registration-and-market-presence\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Absence_Of_Indian_Registration_And_Market_Presence\"><\/span>Absence Of Indian Registration And Market Presence<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court found further that the Irish company had not applied for trademark registration in India even for its THE WHISTLER mark, and that its actual physical products had not entered the Indian market before 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This itself was described as self-destructive of the claim of goodwill and reputation preceding the Indian company&#8217;s 2018 launch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-indian-company-s-trademark-infringement-claim\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Indian_Companys_Trademark_Infringement_Claim\"><\/span>Indian Company&#8217;s Trademark Infringement Claim<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Having dismissed the Irish company&#8217;s passing off claim, the court turned to the Indian company&#8217;s infringement claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Here the legal position was clearer. The Indian company held an unchallenged registration in the mark WHISTLER in India in Class 33 from 3rd April 2008. The Irish company had no Indian registration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-statutory-provisions-applied\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Statutory_Provisions_Applied\"><\/span>Statutory Provisions Applied<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Provision<\/th><th>Legal Effect<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Section 28, Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/td><td>Exclusive right of registered proprietor to use the mark.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 29(2)(b)<\/td><td>Infringement where similar mark and similar goods create likelihood of confusion.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 29(2)(c) read with Section 29(3)<\/td><td>Where marks and goods are identical, confusion is presumed.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-comparison-of-the-marks\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Comparison_Of_The_Marks\"><\/span>Comparison Of The Marks<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court found that the marks THE WHISTLER and WHISTLER are structurally, visually, and phonetically nearly identical or deceptively similar. The rival products are both whiskey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court referred to the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in <em>Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. B. Vijaya Sai and Others<\/em>, (2022) 5 SCC 1, where the addition of the word SAI to RENAISSANCE did not save the mark and the court found the marks RENAISSANCE and SAI RENAISSANCE to be so similar as to attract Section 29(2)(c) read with 29(3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Applying the same principle, adding or removing the word THE did not create any meaningful distinction between WHISTLER and THE WHISTLER.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-confusion-and-consumer-perception\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Confusion_And_Consumer_Perception\"><\/span>Confusion And Consumer Perception<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court also rejected the Irish company&#8217;s defence of no confusion owing to price difference and discerning consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This defence was found to be self-contradictory because the Irish company itself had built its passing off claim on inevitable confusion arising from the similarity of marks and products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A party cannot approbate and reprobate, that is, a party cannot take inconsistent positions at the same time to suit its own convenience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Furthermore, in the liquor industry where advertising is strictly prohibited, the brand name becomes the singular element of consumer recall and purchase decisions at liquor counters are often made orally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under these circumstances, even discerning consumers are likely to be confused when the marks are near identical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-rejection-of-product-difference-argument\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Rejection_Of_Product_Difference_Argument\"><\/span>Rejection Of Product Difference Argument<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court specifically addressed the argument about the different types of whiskey, noting that the Irish company had itself pleaded that rival marks and products being similar would cause confusion, and could not then turn around in the infringement case and argue that the products are so different that no confusion is possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On the infringement claim, the only available defences for the Irish company were:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Registration in India.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Prior use in India under Section 34 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Spillover of transborder reputation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Irish company had failed on all three counts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-balance-of-convenience-and-interim-relief\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Balance_Of_Convenience_And_Interim_Relief\"><\/span>Balance Of Convenience And Interim Relief<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On balance of convenience, the court found that the Indian company had been commercially selling its Whistler whiskey since 2018, had built substantial goodwill and reputation in India, and would suffer irreparable harm if the Irish company were allowed to enter the Indian market under an identical or near-identical mark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The request of the Irish company for interim relief permitting it to sell its existing stock was also refused, because on the date the Irish company filed its suit in December 2025, it did not yet possess the requisite excise approvals to sell the goods in India, which were granted only in January 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This was a calculated risk taken by the Irish company and no equity could be claimed on account of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-final-decision-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Final_Decision_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Final Decision of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court allowed IA 414\/2026 filed by the Indian company and granted an ad interim injunction restraining the Irish company and all those acting on its behalf from selling Irish whiskey in India under the marks <strong>THE WHISTLER<\/strong> and\/or <strong>WHISTLER<\/strong> and\/or any other mark deceptively similar to the Indian company&#8217;s registered mark <strong>WHISTLER<\/strong> during the pendency of the suit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">IA 26995\/2025 filed by the Irish company was dismissed as it had failed to make out a prima facie case of passing off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-point-of-law-settled\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Point_of_Law_Settled\"><\/span>Point of Law Settled<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judgment makes a significant contribution to Indian trademark law by firmly applying and extending the territoriality principle laid down in Toyota Jidosha to the alcohol and liquor industry, rejecting any industry-specific exception.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court settled that in a passing off action by a foreign brand in India, global goodwill and reputation without actual percolation into India is insufficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The foreign brand must demonstrate that its mark was present within Indian territorial jurisdiction through:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Sales<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Advertisements<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Events<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Trade channels<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Other means that would have made the mark known to the relevant consuming public in India<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This presence must be established before the domestic user began occupying the space.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-what-does-not-establish-transborder-reputation\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"What_Does_Not_Establish_Transborder_Reputation\"><\/span>What Does Not Establish Transborder Reputation?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court held that the following factors do not amount to spillover of transborder reputation into India:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Mere accessibility of websites<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Availability of goods online without proof of actual Indian purchases<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Publication in internationally circulated magazines without proof of Indian readership<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Foreign trade awards without Indian connection<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-trademark-infringement-under-the-trade-marks-act-1999\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Trademark_Infringement_Under_the_Trade_Marks_Act_1999\"><\/span>Trademark Infringement Under the Trade Marks Act, 1999<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Furthermore, the court settled that in a claim for trademark infringement by a registered proprietor under Section 29(2)(c) read with 29(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, where marks are identical and goods are identical, confusion is presumed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Price difference or product quality distinction does not constitute a defence, particularly in the alcohol industry where advertising is prohibited and oral articulation of brand names plays a decisive role in consumer purchases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-principle-of-consistency-in-trademark-litigation\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Principle_of_Consistency_in_Trademark_Litigation\"><\/span>Principle of Consistency in Trademark Litigation<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It was also clarified that a party alleging confusion in its own passing off suit cannot simultaneously deny confusion in defending an infringement claim by the opposite party, as such inconsistency amounts to approbating and reprobating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-key-legal-principles-emerging-from-the-judgment\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Legal_Principles_Emerging_from_the_Judgment\"><\/span>Key Legal Principles Emerging from the Judgment<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Legal Issue<\/th><th>Court&#8217;s Finding<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Territoriality Principle<\/td><td>Global reputation alone is insufficient; actual presence in India must be proved.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Passing Off by Foreign Brand<\/td><td>Evidence of recognition among Indian consumers is mandatory.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Website Accessibility<\/td><td>Does not establish transborder reputation without proof of Indian consumer engagement.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Online Availability of Goods<\/td><td>Insufficient without evidence of actual Indian purchases.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Foreign Awards and Publications<\/td><td>Not relevant unless linked to Indian readership or market presence.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Trademark Infringement<\/td><td>Where marks and goods are identical, confusion is presumed under Sections 29(2)(c) and 29(3).<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Price or Quality Difference<\/td><td>Not a valid defence against infringement.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Contradictory Pleadings<\/td><td>A party cannot allege confusion in one proceeding and deny it in another.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-case-details\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Details\"><\/span>Case Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><tbody><tr><th>Case Title<\/th><td>Robert A. Merry and Co. Ltd. v. Piccadily Agro Industries Ltd. and connected matter<\/td><\/tr><tr><th>Date of Order<\/th><td>29th May 2026<\/td><\/tr><tr><th>Case Numbers<\/th><td>CS(COMM) 1164\/2025 and CS(COMM) 9\/2026<\/td><\/tr><tr><th>Neutral Citation<\/th><td>2026:DHC:4852<\/td><\/tr><tr><th>Name of Court<\/th><td>High Court of Delhi at New Delhi<\/td><\/tr><tr><th>Hon&#8217;ble Judge<\/th><td>Hon&#8217;ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/friends-of-the-irish-environment-v-government-of-ireland-2020-climate-litigation\/\">Friends Of The Irish Environment vs Ireland (2020): (A Landmark Climate Litigation Case and Its Impact on Environmental Constitutionalism<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/whistle-blower-protection-comparative-analysis-between-usa-indian-law\/\">Whistle blower Protection: A Comparative Analysis between USA and Indian Law<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/whiskey-and-the-shadow-of-cannibalism-the-dark-episode-of-james-sligo-jameson\/\">Whiskey and the Shadow of Cannibalism: The Dark Episode of James Sligo Jameson<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-law-explained-a-guide-to-protecting-brand-rights\/\">Trademark law explained: A Guide to Protecting Brand Rights<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/the-trademarks-act-1999-essential-provisions-and-comprehensive-overview\/\">The Trademarks Act, 1999: Essential Provisions and Comprehensive Overview<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Introduction In a world increasingly connected by trade, travel, and digital media, a foreign brand may become well known in a country even before it physically arrives there. But does that familiarity alone give the foreign brand legal protection against a domestic rival who has been selling under the same name for years? This is<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":25651,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[5149],"class_list":["post-25652","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-intellectual-property","tag-intellectual-property"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.7 (Yoast SEO v27.8) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court&#039;s WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court&#039;s WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"686\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"475\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\"},\"headline\":\"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3632,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/Capture-7.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/\",\"name\":\"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/Capture-7.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"Delhi High Court's WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/Capture-7.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/Capture-7.jpg\",\"width\":686,\"height\":475,\"caption\":\"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Intellectual Property > Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\",\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\"},\"description\":\"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/ajayamitabhsuman\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"Delhi High Court's WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality","og_description":"Delhi High Court's WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":686,"height":475,"url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/"},"author":{"name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305"},"headline":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality","datePublished":"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/"},"wordCount":3632,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","keywords":["Intellectual Property"],"articleSection":["Intellectual Property"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/","name":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","datePublished":"2026-06-13T12:04:55+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-13T12:10:28+00:00","description":"Delhi High Court's WHISTLER trademark ruling clarifies transborder reputation, passing off, and trademark infringement in India.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","width":686,"height":475,"caption":"Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trans-boarder-reputation-and-principle-of-territoriality\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Intellectual Property > Trans-Boarder Reputation and Principle of Territoriality"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305","name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN"},"description":"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/ajayamitabhsuman\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Capture-7.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25652","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25652"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26069,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25652\/revisions\/26069"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/25651"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}