pfizer, trademark, consumer, consumerseva, pharma

Pfizer Wins Vigoura Battle

In a significant legal victory, the Delhi High Court has handed down a permanent injunction against Renovision Exports Pvt. Ltd., prohibiting the use of the trademark “Vigoura” due to its infringement upon Pfizer’s renowned “Viagra.”

pfize, consumer, rights, trademark, legal battle, consumer protection , pharma

Background

Pfizer, a pharmaceutical giant, filed a lawsuit against Renovision Exports Pvt. Ltd., alleging trademark infringement. The base of Pfizer’s claim rested on the striking similarity between “Vigoura” and their well-established brand, “Viagra.”

Court’s Verdict

Justice Sanjeev Narula, presiding over the case, recognized the national and global reputation of “Viagra.” Consequently, the court issued a permanent injunction, effectively barring Renovision from utilizing the “Vigoura” trademark.

Legal Prohibition

The court’s order explicitly prohibits Renovision and its affiliates from engaging in any activities related to the manufacturing, selling, or marketing of products under the “Vigoura” mark or any similar variants.

Damages Assessment

Although Pfizer initially sought damages amounting to Rs. 20 lakhs, the court awarded nominal damages totaling Rs. 3 lakhs to the pharmaceutical company.

Plaintiff’s Allegations

Pfizer’s lawsuit was rooted in Renovision’s sale of products under the infringing “Vigoura” mark, including items such as “Nervine Tonic for Men.”

Defendant’s Response

Renovision countered Pfizer’s claims by asserting its production of homeopathic medicines, such as “VIGOURA 1000,” “VIGOURA 2000,” and “VIGOURA 5000.” This counterargument set the stage for a legal battle centered on trademark rights.

Court’s Analysis

Thus in scrutinizing the case, the court determined that the addition of numerical identifiers to “Vigoura” failed to sufficiently distinguish it from “Viagra.” This lack of distinction raised concerns regarding potential consumer confusion, prompting the court’s decision.

Deceptive Similarity

Therefore court’s ruling emphasized the deceptive similarity between “Vigoura” and “Viagra.” It highlighted the risk of consumer misidentification and associated brand dilution.

Impact of Advertising

Furthermore, the court took note of the extensive advertising and promotional campaigns surrounding “Viagra.” These efforts, disseminated across various health publications, contributed significantly to the brand’s widespread recognition.

Judicial Observation

While acknowledging the role of health-focused publications, the court underscored their influence in shaping public perception and establishing “Viagra’s” transborder reputation.

Conclusion

The verdict rendered by the Delhi High Court underscores the critical importance of safeguarding trademark integrity. By upholding Pfizer’s rights and preventing brand confusion, the court reaffirmed the significance of trademark protection in the pharmaceutical sector.

Pfizer’s triumph in the trademark dispute against Renovision Exports Pvt. Ltd. serves as a testament to the judiciary’s commitment to upholding intellectual property rights. The ruling sets a precedent for the stringent enforcement of trademark laws, ensuring the preservation of brand identity and consumer trust within the pharmaceutical industry.

Thus or more information contact us at :

[email protected]

Further to know more visit us at:

http://www.consumerseva.com

Payal Sharma

Payal Sharma

Articles: 9

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *