We are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
We started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
We and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
The article in this issue of IPR Amicus deals with a noteworthy decision of the Indian Patents Office on the pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970. It also outlines the intervention of higher judicial forums in matters where quasi-judicial authorities have not dealt with a case in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The authors note that the said decision of the Controller was essentially a reasoned up-gradation of its earlier non-speaking order. According to the authors, this decision highlights the need for quasi-judicial authorities to issue reasoned orders which will obviate the need for protracted proceedings involving multiple judicial forums and ensure that precious judicial time is not spent on mere procedural matters...
Ratio decidendi
Copyright infringement is a cognizable and non-bailable offence – Supreme Court
Re-advertisement not an option after trademark registered – High Court asks petitioner to use alternative statutory remedy of seeking cancellation of mark – Delhi High Court
Trademarks – Use of word ‘PEBBLE’ for dissimilar goods when amounts to infringement – Delhi High Court
Patents – Mere filing of revocation proceedings cannot be a ‘credible challenge’ to an old and successful patent – Himachal Pradesh High Court
Invisible use of trademarks as adwords or meta tags on application stores amounts to trademark infringement – Delhi High Court
News Nuggets
IPR suits, even those valued below INR 0.3 million, to be instituted before District Judge (Commercial)
Trademarks – Territorial jurisdiction of Court – Effect of quantum of seizure/operation
Copyright in music played in marriage functions – Delhi High Court appoints expert to assist court
‘Use’ of trademark by an online intermediary
Trademarks – ‘Acquiescence’ clarified by the Court of Justice of the European Union
