Red Bull energy drink IP battle: Commercial High Court extends enjoining order
Tuesday, 17 September 2013 00:38
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
By S.S. Selvanayagam
Commercial High Court fixed for objection for 4 October in respect of the intellectual property litigation filed by Swiss based Red Bull AG against the importer Bilco Best International Ltd. energy drink branded as ‘Kratingdaeng’ meaning Red Bull.
The matter came up before the High Court Judge Mahinda Samayawardena and the enjoining order was also extended till the said date. Plaintiff cited Bilco Best International Ltd. and the Director General of Customs as Defendants.
Manoj Bandara instructed by Sudath Perera Associates appeared for the Plaintiff while Sanjaya Fonseka appeared for the 1st Defendant. The Plaintiff was able to detect a consignment of the Thai product passing customs, and immediately informed Sri Lanka Customs to detain the container and prevent its release. The Plaintiff in its action states that the infringing product is not manufactured by the Plaintiff nor under license from the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff has not licensed and/or authorised any other party to manufacture or sell the infringing product.
The Plaintiff further avers that the Plaintiff, as the registered owner of the Red Bull trademarks has not consented and/or authorised and/or licensed the 1st Defendant and/or any other person to use the said trademarks.
Due to the tremendous goodwill and reputation and unmatched brand value associated with the Red Bull trademarks, the Kratingdaeng Red Bull product imported by the 1st Defendant Company would mislead the public and the consumers to mistakenly believe that both the Kratingdaeng product and the Red bull energy drink product emanates from the same source, the plaintiff contends.
Plaintiff pleaded in its Plaint that the acts of the 1st Defendant in importing the infringing product into Sri Lanka and/or distributing and/or marketing and/or offering for sale and/or dealing in the infringing product in Sri Lanka without the consent of the Plaintiff would cause and/or are likely to cause confusion, would damage and/or dilute the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff and mislead the public with respect to the quality and/or source of the product.
The Court has already issued Enjoining Orders preventing the 1st Defendant and/or any one acting under or through it or on its behalf from releasing into free circulation, the infringing products imported by the 1st Defendant and also preventing the 1st Defendant and/or any one acting under or through it or on its behalf from importing and/or distributing and/or marketing and/or offering for sale in any manner whatsoever, any products bearing the Plaintiff’s trade name ‘Red Bull’ and/or the trademarks referred to and depicted in paragraph 12(c) of the Plaint.
