By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Opportunity
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Internships
    • Jobs
    • Events & Workshops
    • Moot Court
    • Call For Papers
  • Editorials
  • Case Analysis
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
  • Submit Blog
Reading: Delhi High Court Awards ₹3.34 Crore Compensation to Johnson & Johnson in Counterfeit Medical Products Case
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
Font ResizerAa
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Case Analysis
  • Subject Notes
  • Jobs
  • Opportunity
  • Editorials
  • About Us
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Case Analysis
  • Subject Notes
    • LAW OF TORT
    • Constitution Law
    • CRIMINAL LAW
    • Family law
    • Contract Law
    • IPR
    • international law
    • Banking law
    • COMPANY LAW
    • CYBER LAW
    • Environmental law
  • Jobs
  • Opportunity
    • Internships
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Events & Workshops
  • Editorials
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Submit Blog Post
Follow US
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Lawyer's Arc > Editorials > Delhi High Court Awards ₹3.34 Crore Compensation to Johnson & Johnson in Counterfeit Medical Products Case
EditorialsNews

Delhi High Court Awards ₹3.34 Crore Compensation to Johnson & Johnson in Counterfeit Medical Products Case

"Counterfeiting of medical devices is not merely a case of trade mark infringement, it is a grave offence that endangers lives," the Court added.

The Johnson & Johnson logo is displayed at company offices on October 17, 2023 in Irvine, California. Mario Tama via Getty Images
Pankaj Pandey
Last updated: 15/03/2025 7:40 PM
Pankaj Pandey
Published 13/03/2025
Share
3 Min Read
SHARE

Background

Johnson & Johnson (J&J) filed a lawsuit in 2019 against M/s Medserve and others for counterfeiting and illegally selling J&J’s medical products, including SURGICEL, a product used in surgical procedures.

Contents
BackgroundKey FindingsCourt RulingQuotes from the Court and JudgmentInjunctionImplicationsConclusion

Key Findings

  • The defendants were found guilty of manufacturing and selling counterfeit SURGICEL products, which posed severe risks to patient safety.
  • The counterfeit products were sold in India and exported to other countries, including the US.
  • The court held that the defendants’ actions constituted trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and passing off.

Court Ruling

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of J&J, awarding ₹3.34 crore in damages. The breakdown of the award is as follows:

  • ₹2.34 crore in compensatory damages for the harm caused to J&J’s business and reputation.
  • ₹1 crore in exemplary damages to deter future infringements.

Quotes from the Court and Judgment

“The evidence presented before the Court, including invoices, bank receipts, and chat extracts, establishes without a doubt that defendant no. 1 has received substantial financial gains in the course of carrying out the infringing and counterfeiting activities,” the Court said.

-Story After Advertisement -

“I am convinced with the evidence presented and submissions made by the counsel for Plaintiff and conclude that a conservative profit margin of 25% can be assumed for awarding actual damages in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the present case,” the judgment said.

Injunction

The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from:

  • Using J&J’s trademarks, including the SURGICEL mark.
  • Selling counterfeit products.
  • Engaging in any activities that could mislead consumers into believing that the counterfeit products are genuine J&J products.

Implications

The court’s ruling highlights the importance of protecting intellectual property rights, particularly in the healthcare industry where counterfeit products can have serious consequences for patient safety.

-Story After Advertisement -

Conclusion


The Delhi High Court’s decision sends a strong message that counterfeiting and trademark infringement will not be tolerated. The award of ₹3.34 crore in damages and the grant of a permanent injunction demonstrate the court’s commitment to protecting the rights of intellectual property owners and ensuring public safety.

Click here to read the original judgment//


Related

You Might Also Like

India-Pakistan Tensions: Pakistan Breaches Ceasefire Again Despite Recent Agreement with India

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ORDERS PRESERVATION OF BYJU’S CIRP EMAIL RECORDS AMID CRIMINAL PROBE

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ORDERS DEPLOYMENT OF CENTRAL ARMED FORCES IN MURSHIDABAD AFTER WAQF ACT PROTEST TURNS VIOLENT

UP COP NAMES JUDGE AS ACCUSED IN THEFT CASE PROCLAMATION, COURT ORDERS PROBE

SUPREME COURT DIRECTS FSSAI TO SUBMIT REPORT ON FRONT-OF-PACKAGE WARNING LABELS WITHIN THREE MONTHS

TAGGED:Delhi High CourtJohnson & Johnson
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Share
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
YoutubeSubscribe
TelegramFollow

Join Telegram Channel

Join Whatsapp Channel

- Advertisement -
Lawyer's Arc Logo

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
[mc4wp_form]
Popular News
LAW OF TORT

False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort

LA | Admin
LA | Admin
18/03/2024
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
- Advertisement -
Submit Post LAwyer's ArcSubmit Post LAwyer's Arc
- Advertisement -
Archives
False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort
18/03/2024
Lawyer's Arc Internship
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
23/04/2025
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
18/03/2024
Advocates Amendment Bill
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
22/02/2025
AIBE 19 RESULT DOWNLOAD
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
23/03/2025

You Might Also Like

EditorialsNews

MADRAS HIGH COURT SLAMS DELAY IN COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT, ORDERS JOB FOR DECEASED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE’S WIDOW

13/04/2025
EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES PRESIDENT AND GOVERNOR’S POWERS OVER STATE BILLS IN LANDMARK VERDICT

12/04/2025
EditorialsNews

KERALA HIGH COURT GRANTS BAIL TO 91-YEAR-OLD MAN ACCUSED OF ATTACKING 88-YEAR-OLD WIFE OVER ALLEGED INFIDELITY

12/04/2025
EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT SEEKS DETAILED STATUS REPORT ON ILLEGAL ENCROACHMENTS ALONG RIVER GANGA IN BIHAR

12/04/2025
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?