Delhi HC restrains firm from using Swiss Military symbol in trademark case

The court also cited the Daboutt's division bench's judgment in Shree Nath vs Allied Blenders and Distillers Pvt. Ltd where the wonderment principle was elaborated

Swiss flag
Bhavini Mishra New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Jan 04 2023 | 9:07 PM IST
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday restrained a private entity from using “Swiss Military” as a trademark and the Swiss flag symbol (white cross on a red background) on its clothing, pointing out that false trade description could not be registered.

The court’s intellectual property division gave its judgment on a pair of appeals challenging the Registrar of Trademarks’ orders allowing registration of “Swiss Military” and the use of the Swiss insignia.

The appellant, Swiss government arm Armasuisse, had challenged the deputy registrar’s orders favouring a private company.

The court said that the inherent nature of a mark (in this case, the cross symbol) itself would confuse people, citing Section 9(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 — which relates to deceptive marks. It pointed out that the use of such marks by the clothing firm went against the Act. The company had applied for the “Swiss Military” name and was using it with the flag symbol, both of which were deemed deceptive by the court.

The court said vis-à-vis the label with a black-and-white cross that once a mark is registered, it is acceptable to be used for all colours. Hence, any limiting criteria for colours do not apply. As such, a mark with a red-and-white or black-and-white colour combination is equally ineligible for registration. The court clarified that a red cross with white background and the words “Swiss Military” serve as a source identifier for the goods of Swiss origin.

The court also cited the Delhi High Court division bench’s judgment in <Shree Nath vs Allied Blenders and Distillers Pvt. Ltd> that had elaborated on the wonderment principle. It implies that if the consumer is in a state of wonder about the nature of a mark, there’s confusion about the origin of the goods.

Advocate Pravin Anand, appearing for Armasuisse, pointed out that from filing appeal to the judgment, the matter was settled in just 35 days. “This will strengthen public faith in India’s intellectual property laws,” he said.

One subscription. Two world-class reads.

Already subscribed? Log in

Subscribe to read the full story →
Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Quarterly Starter

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

Save 46%

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Access to Exclusive Premium Stories Online

  • Over 30 behind the paywall stories daily, handpicked by our editors for subscribers

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

Topics :Delhi High CourtTrademark

Next Story