Patent infringement occurs when a party exercises any of the exclusive rights of a patent holder without permission. In India, patent law is primarily governed by the Patents Act, 1970 which provides the legal framework for granting patents and protecting the rights of patent holders. Caselaws play a pivotal role in interpreting and applying these statutory provisions by offering guidance on what constitutes infringement, the remedies available and the evolving legal landscape. This article provides case laws on patent infringement in India with highlighting their significance across various sectors. The discussion is structured to cover the legal framework, landmark cases and key legal issues, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the subject.
Step into the future of legal expertise! Join our Advanced Certification Program in Intellectual Property Law, created by The Legal School in collaboration with Khaitan & Co. Designed for fresh law graduates and professionals, this unique course boosts your legal career. Don’t miss this opportunity—enquire today to secure your spot!
Legal Framework for Patent Infringement in India
Under Section 48 of Patents Act, 1970, the patent holder is granted exclusive rights to prevent others from making, using, selling, or importing the patented invention without consent. Infringement is addressed under Sections 104 to 111 and 113 to 115, which outline the jurisdiction of courts and the remedies available, such as injunctions, damages and account of profits. The Act also provides for certain exceptions, such as government use given under Section 47 and use in foreign vessels which is given in Section 49 which do not constitute infringement.
Patent infringement can be broadly categorized into direct and indirect infringement. Direct infringement occurs when a party directly uses, makes, or sells the patented invention, while indirect infringement involves inducing or contributing to infringement. Additionally, the Indian legal system recognizes doctrines like the Doctrine of Equivalents, which allows a patentee to claim infringement even if the accused device does not literally infringe the patent claims but performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result.
The burden of proof lies with the patent holder, who must prove that the alleged product or process of infringer contains all the elements of patented invention.
Key Case Laws on Patent Infringement in India
The courts have made several landmark judgments that shaped the understanding and enforcement of patent infringement laws. These cases span various sectors, including pharmaceuticals, technology and mechanical engineering and address a range of legal issues, from the application of the Doctrine of Equivalents to the enforcement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs).
Case Laws on Patent Infringement in Pharmaceutical Sector
The pharmaceutical sector has always been a hotspot for patent infringement disputes because of the high stakes involved in drug development and the public interest in affordable healthcare.
1. FMC Corporation & Ors. v Natco Pharma Limited (2022)
FMC vs Nacto involved a process patent for Chlorantraniliprole (CTPR), where the plaintiff alleged infringement under the Doctrine of Equivalents. The court here found no infringement because the process of defendant used sulfonyl chloride instead of thionyl chloride with distinct reaction sequences. This judgement highlights the importance of precise claim drafting in process patents and the limitations of the Doctrine of Equivalents when processes differ significantly.
2. Vifor v MSN Laboratories & Ors.
The case of Vifor vs MSN Laboratories clarified the scope of product-by-process claims in the pharmaceutical sector. The court emphasized that the infringement of a patent depends on the essential characteristics of the product and not merely on the process which is used to create it. This decision underscores the need for clear claim language in order to avoid ambiguity in such patents.
3. Novartis vs. Cipla (2015)
The case of Novartis vs Cipla centered on the infringement of a patent for the drug Onbrez with Cipla and arguing for public interest in affordable generics. The Delhi High Court granted a temporary injunction to Novartis which was upheld on appeal in 2017. This case illustrates the tension between patent rights and public health, especially in access to medicines.
4. Bayer Corporation v. Union of India (2009)
In the case of Bayer Corporation v. Union of India, the court upheld compulsory license for the drug Sorafenib by deciding that it did not constitute infringement due to public interest considerations. This case highlighted that compulsory licensing balances patent rights with the need for affordable healthcare.
5. Merck Sharpe and Dohme Corporation v. Glenmark
The Supreme Court granted a permanent injunction by involving patents for antidiabetic drugs and held that the product of the defendant infringed the patent. This case ensured the strict enforcement of pharmaceutical patents.
6. Indoco Remedies Ltd v. Bristol Myers Squibb Holdings
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the defendant sought to sell a generic drug, citing public interest. The Delhi High Court denied the sale, finding no evidence of a drug shortage. This case shows how courts weigh patent rights against emergency public interest claims.
Dive into Best IPR Law Firms in India.
Case Laws on Patent Infringement in Technology and Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)
The technology sector, particularly involving SEPs has seen significant litigation due to the critical role of these patents in modern communication standards.
1. Ericsson v. Micromax (2013)
This case involved SEPs for GSM, EDGE and 3G technologies. The Delhi High Court made its decision in the favor of Ericsson by holding Micromax liable for royalties and emphasizing the importance of Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms in licensing agreements. This case has shaped the SEP enforcement in India.
2. Ericsson v Xiaomi (2016)
In this case, Ericsson alleged infringement of eight SEPs where the Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction, later modified, reinforcing the importance of FRAND terms. This case further clarified the application of FRAND in SEP disputes, ensuring a balance between patent rights and industry standards.
Read about What is a Trade Secret?
Case Laws on Patent Infringement in Other Sectors
Patent infringement cases also span other industries such as automotive and electrical engineering, which demonstrate the broad applicability of patent law.
1. BAJAJ Auto Limited Vs. TVS Motor Company Limited (2009)
The Madras High Court applied the Doctrine of Equivalents by holding that TVS’s product infringed BAJAJ’s patent despite improvements. This case demonstrates the application of doctrine of equivalents in mechanical patents which ensured that the minor variations do not evade infringement liability.
2. Strix Ltd v. Maharaja Appliances Limited
This case involved patented temperature control technology for electric kettles. The court found infringement, protecting Strix’s patent rights. Strix vs Maharaja highlighted robust enforcement of patents in the electrical sector.
3. Ravi Kamal Bali v. Kala Tech. and Ors
The Bombay High Court applied the Doctrine of Equivalents in this case by finding the infringement despite differences in the product of defendants. This case reaffirms the role of doctrine of equivalents in protecting patent holders from minor variations.
4. Shogun Organics Ltd v. Gaur Hari Guchhait
The court in Shogun vs Gaur held that prior registration under the Insecticides Act did not constitute prior use and granted an injunction. This case law clarifies the concept of prior use in patent law, which ensures that statutory registrations do not automatically exempt infringement.
Summary
The case laws on patent infringement in India provide a rich tapestry of legal principles and applications across various sectors. These case laws underscores the importance of patent claims, the application of legal doctrines like the Doctrine of Equivalents and the balancing of patent rights with public interest. The pharmaceutical sector cases, such as Novartis vs. Cipla and Bayer Corporation v. Union of India, highlight the tension between innovation and access to affordable healthcare, while technology cases like Ericsson v. Micromax set precedents for SEP licensing. Other sectors like automotive and electrical engineering, demonstrate the broad applicability of patent law. Understanding these cases is crucial for patent holders, potential infringers and legal practitioners to navigate the complexities of patent law in India. As technology and innovation continue to evolve, staying updated on these legal developments remains essential for safeguarding intellectual property rights.
Related Posts:
Case Laws on Patent Infringement in India: FAQs
Q1. What is patent infringement in India?
Patent infringement occurs when someone uses, makes, sells, or imports a patented invention without permission, violating the patent holder’s rights under the Patents Act, 1970.
Q2. Which law governs patent infringement in India?
The Patents Act, 1970, governs patent infringement, with Section 48 granting exclusive rights and Sections 104-115 outlining remedies like injunctions and damages.
Q3. What is the Doctrine of Equivalents in Indian patent law?
It allows claiming infringement if a product performs substantially the same function as the patented invention, as seen in BAJAJ Auto vs. TVS Motor (2009).
Q4. How do courts balance patent rights and public interest?
Cases like Bayer Corporation v. Union of India (2009) show courts using compulsory licensing to prioritize public health.
Q5. What role do Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) play?
SEPs, as in Ericsson v. Micromax (2013), requires Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing to balance innovation and industry standards.
