MOOT PROBLEM

OBJECTIVE AND DISCLAIMER

This Moot Problem has been formulated solely for the purpose enabling the student to
familiarize themselves with the law and practice on the Trademark and for furthering the
academic exercise only. The facts stated in this moot problem as fictitious. The facts, names,
locations and dates bear no resemblance to any person, event or happening whether dead or
alive. Any resemblance, if any found is purely coincidental. This Moot Problem does not intend
to hurt the feelings of any section of society or to offend any person.

INTRODUCTION

The growth of trade and cross-border business activities marked a transition to expanding
intellectual property rights. After the Economic Globalization and functioning of WTO, almost
all the countries are attracting TMCs for investment in their country. As investment in portfolio
form is not so profitable in comparison to that of FDI, these countries have started providing to
these Business Giants an environment for operating their business in their territory and drawing
profit. As a result, the world saw how the capital which were concentrated in a few developed
countries started travelling to developing and least developed countries. And then the role of
technologies, which has increased the pace of such capital shifts. As motive of more profit
decides the route of capital shift, FDI are taking place in such territories and in such business
activities in where there is scope of earning comparative profit and security of their investment.
Our experience for two decades identified the said business activities as activities in where
involved the protection of technology transfer. And takeover of the local business by TMCs is
only the aspects of Technology transfer involved in the operation of FDI, which is carefully done
while thoroughly considering on the object of taking over, i.e., Trademark, Goodwill,
Confidential Information, Know-How, Trade Secrets, among other things.

The present case is in context of infringement of trademark in Vardhan Republic, a developing

country in South Asia. The Capital of Vardhan Republic is Sadabganj. The political system of
Vardhan Republic is exactly similar to that of India. Like India, Vardhan Republic is also the
members of WTO. The procedural laws of Vardhan Republic are identical to that of India.the
law on the Intellectual Property Rights is also modeled exactly on the line that of India. In other
word, Constitution of Vardhan Republic as well as all legislation of this Republic is pari material
to that of India. Being the common law country, the doctrine of stare decisis in Vardhan
Republic is in equal footing with that of India.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

For the sake of brevity and convenience of the honorable court the facts of the present case are
summarized as follows:

1. The Plaintiff, Thunder Taste Company, is the largest brand of soft drinks operating in 179
countries. A similar business related to mineral water and soft drink is done also by
defendant, Vardhan Farmfresh International Pvt. Ltd. Its soft drink product bearing
trademark ‘AQUATHIRST’ used to be very popular brand product in the country.
2. On May 1st 2015, Mr. A (CEO) of the company, sold the trademark, formulation rights,
know-how, intellectual property rights, goodwill, etc. of its soft drink product
AQUATHRIST to plantiff for India only.
3. In 2021, in the month of January, the plaintiff filed an application for registration of the
trademark ‘AQUATHRIST’ in Rethonia.
4. After information of this fact, the defendant sent the plaintiff a legal notice, on April 17 th
of 2021, repudiating the License Agreement thereby ceasing the plaintiff from
manufacturing AQUATHRIST and using its trademark etc. directly or indirectly by itself
or through its affiliates.
5. The notice claimed that the plaintiff had breached the said agreement by attempting
‘AQUATHRIST’ in Rethonia whereas the agreements/assignments between the parties
allowed the plaintiff to use AQUATHRIST in Vardhan Republic alone.
6. The notice mentioned that the defendant “may proceed to use the same after complying
with legal formalities and procedures as per the law of the land.”

STATEMENT OF JURISDICATION

Before the High Court of Sadabganj, Sadabganj

The counsels representing the petitioner have endorsed their pleadings before the honorable High
Court of Sadabganj at Sadabganj under Article 2261 of the Constitution of Vardhan Republic in
which the honorable court has jurisdiction.

1
226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs

(1) Notwithstanding anything in Article 32 every High Court shall have powers, throughout the territories in relation to which it
exercise jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories
directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibitions, quo warranto and certiorari, or
any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose
(2) The power conferred by clause ( 1 ) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be
exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in
part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such
person is not within those territories
(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or
in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause ( 1 ), without
(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order; and
(b) giving such party an opportunity of being heard, makes an application to the High Court for the vacation of such order and
furnishes a copy of such application to the party in whose favour such order has been made or the counsel of such party, the High
Court shall dispose of the application within a period of two weeks from the date on which it is received or from the date on
which the copy of such application is so furnished, whichever is later, or where the High Court is closed on the last day of that
period, before the expiry of the next day afterwards on which the High Court is open; and if the application is not so disposed of,
the interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or, as the case may be, the expiry of the aid next day, stand vacated
(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme court
by clause ( 2 ) of Article 32