Carlsberg Breweries v. Som Distilleries & Breweries
Rule established
Design piracy: overall visual impression test; minor differences do not negate piracy if essential features are reproduced
Facts
- Carlsberg registered the design of its distinctive beer bottle shape in India
- Som Distilleries launched a beer with a bottle shape substantially similar to Carlsberg's registered design
- Carlsberg sued for piracy under S.22 of the Designs Act, 2000
Issue
- Whether Som's bottle shape constituted piracy (obvious imitation) of Carlsberg's registered design under S.22.
Held
- Piracy established. The competitor's bottle was an obvious imitation; when viewed through the eyes of an informed user, the overall visual impression was substantially identical. Minor variations (slight differences in label placement, cap colour) did not prevent piracy when the essential shape features were reproduced.
Ratio Decidendi
Under S.22, piracy occurs when the essential features of a registered design are applied to an article without consent. The test is overall visual impression to the eye of an informed user; minor peripheral differences do not save an otherwise infringing design.
How to use it in an exam
- State the piracy test under S.22
- Key line: "Design piracy is assessed by overall visual impression; minor differences in non-essential features do not negate piracy."
Source
Source: Delhi HC Orders
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.
Cited in study notes
Intellectual Property LawIndustrial Designs The Designs Act 2000Illustrates overall visual impression test for piracy under S.22