Aveda Corporation v Dabur India Ltd

Core Citations

CONSIDERS

• Sabel BV v Puma AG (Case C-251/95)
• BM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

REFERS TO

• South Cone Inc. v Bessant and Others (t/a Reef)
• Novartis Seeds B.v's Application
• Rousselon Freres Et Cie v Horwood Homewares Ltd

CITES

• Glaxo Plc v Glaxo-Wellcome Ltd
• Stichting Bdo and Others v BDO Unibank, Inc. and Others
• British Sugar Plc v James Robertson & Sons Ltd

[See more]

• Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and Others (Appellants/ Claimants) v Asda Stores Ltd (Respondent /Defendant)
• Omega Engineering Incorporated (Claimant and Respondent) v Omega S.a. (Omega Ag) (Omega Ltd) (Defendant and Appellant)

CONSIDERS

• Trade Marks Act 1994
• Trade Marks Act 1994

CONSIDERED in

• SoulCycle Inc. v Matalan Ltd
• Virgin Enterprises Ltd v Virginic LLC
• Natural Instinct Ltd v Natures Menu Ltd

REFERRED in

• Virgin Enterprises Ltd v Virginic LLC
• Andrew Powell v Martin Robert Turner
• Natural Instinct Ltd v Natures Menu Ltd

CITED in

• Interflora, Inc. and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another
• Whyte and MacKay Ltd v Origin Wine UK Ltd and Another

This document cites

• Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and Others (Appellants/ Claimants) v Asda Stores Ltd (Respondent /Defendant)
• South Cone Inc. v Bessant and Others (t/a Reef)
• Omega Engineering Incorporated (Claimant and Respondent) v Omega S.a. (Omega Ag) (Omega Ltd) (Defendant and Appellant)
• Rousselon Freres Et Cie v Horwood Homewares Ltd
• Stichting Bdo and Others v BDO Unibank, Inc. and Others



See all quotations

• Glaxo Plc v Glaxo-Wellcome Ltd
• Novartis Seeds B.v's Application
• British Sugar Plc v James Robertson & Sons Ltd
• Sabel BV v Puma AG (Case C-251/95)
• BM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
• Trade Marks Act 1994
• Medion AG v Thomson multimedia Sales Germany & Austria GmbH.
• Marca Mode CV contra Adidas AG y Adidas Benelux BV.
• Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc., formerly Pathe Communications Corporation.
• Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) v Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas.
• Société des produits Nestlé SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
• Bimbo, SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
• Matratzen Concord GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
• Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co. GmbH contra Klijsen Handel BV.
• SABEL BV contra Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport.