Cross-border trade plays a vital role in boosting a country’s economic growth. With accelerated globalization, we have observed India emerging as one of the major players in the global supply chain. In the past decade, there has been a substantial rise in cross-border transactions; both in terms of volume and value and this rise has revealed various statutory hurdles in the extant applicable laws governing cross-border trade.
The article discusses the recent circular which is issued by International Finance Services Centres Authority (‘IFSCA’) for imposing an obligation on Authorised FMEs, registered FMEs (Non-Retail) and Registered FMEs (Retail) to maintain a website or a webpage dedicated to their fund management activities in the IFSC.
The article discusses the conceptual foundations of the force of attraction rule, traces its judicial evolution in India, and evaluates the relevance of the doctrine in an era increasingly shaped by source-based taxation and digital nexus rules.
The notification of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 (‘2026 Scheme’) with effect from 1 July 2026, was anticipated to settle and provide clarity on the regulatory framework governing international workers under the Code on Social Security, 2020. However, it has done the opposite in one respect. The 2026 Scheme retains a dedicated framework for international workers and carries forward the substance of the erstwhile Paragraph 83 of the EPF Scheme, 1952 (‘1952 Scheme’) and Paragraph 43A of the EPS, 1995.
One of the permissible ways of amendments to claims and/or specification is to incorporate suitable disclaimers during the patent prosecution and at the post grant stage. The article aims to bring down the perspectives of the use of disclaimers as a provision to amend claims and/or specification. It focusses on provisions available under Section 59 of the Patents Act, 1970 and a glimpse on such provisions in major jurisdictions such as US and EU that are of greater interest.
The article dives deep into the understanding of certain key actors engaged in the processing of personal data – Data Fiduciaries and Data Processors. Observing that while Fiduciaries, by their nature, are expected to exercise decisional control over the purposes and means of processing, and Processors act on the former’s instructions, the article outline various complex situations where the roles blur.
This article intends to provide an overview of some of the key issues for negotiation at MC 13 and the importance of these issues for WTO Members. It talks about Agreement on Investment Facilitation and Development, Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, Permanent Solution for Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes, WTO Dispute Settlement Reform, and Electronic Commerce.
The article discusses the observation of the Supreme Court in Northern Operating Systems case, recent investigations on the issue, CBIC Instruction, interim orders passed by different High Courts on factual matrix of the cases, legal position under the GST law and the way forward. Elaborating on the test / factors to determine the employee-employer relationship, the article deliberates on application of said tests/factors on the Supreme Court decision, and the factual differentiation of case.
The article discusses the recent decision of Single Judge of the Delhi High Court adjudicating a batch of suits filed by Pharmacyclics LLC and Johnson and Johnson Pvt. Ltd., pertaining to the infringement of Indian Patent 262968 against Hetero Labs, Natco Pharma, BDR Pharma, Alkem Labs and Shilpa Medicare for manufacturing and marketing Ibrutinib. The Court restrained the Defendants in all suits from manufacturing and marketing Ibrutinib, pending final disposal of the suits.
The article discusses the recent judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of MakeMyTrip India Pvt. Ltd, Booking Netherlands & Booking India and Google LLC in which the court reiterated that use of trademark as key words of search engines displays of someone else advertisement, absent any confusion or unfair advantage, would not infringe the trademark.
There are two discernible facets when a celebrity wants to protect their personality rights: first, the right to protect one’s image from being commercially exploited without permission by treating it as a tort of passing off and second, the right to privacy which entails one’s right to be left alone. Analysing jurisprudential development in US and UK, the article elaborately summarises many case law governing jurisprudence in India on IP laws.
A recent order passed by the Delhi High Court in favour of DPKA Universal Consumer Venture, rejecting the plea of interim injunction by Lotus Herbals against the former’s use of ‘Lotus Splash’, has garnered a lot of attention. The decision discusses the question of infringement, with specific reference to Section 30(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The article discusses this interim order and analyses the jurisprudence on Section 30(2)(a).
The Article discuss the Delhi High Court decision in the matter of Novartis AG v. Natco Pharma & Anr. where the Court held that clear distinction between the examination and the opposition process of patents is essential, and merging these distinct processes would render the entire system unwieldy and counterproductive. The High Court was deliberating on the question as to whether the opponent has a right to be heard..
The article discusses a recent decision of the RoC, NCT, adjudicating penalty for violation under Section 89 (Declaration in respect of Beneficial Interest in any share) and Section 90 (Register of Significant Beneficial Owner in a company). Elaborately analysing the decision and its implications, the authors are of the view that the RoC has taken a stricter approach with respect to compliances...
The article discusses the measures introduced under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (‘DPDP Act’) to address challenges around management of data principals’ consent. The authors note that it is important for entities offering consent management services to ensure that their activities do not fall within the ambit of data processing.
The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from advertising and soliciting work through communication in the public domain. This website is meant solely for the purpose of information and not for the purpose of advertising. Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan does not intend to solicit clients through this website. We do not take responsibility for decisions taken by the reader based solely on the information provided in the website. By clicking on 'ACCEPT', the visitor acknowledges that the information provided in the website (a) does not amount to advertising or solicitation and (b) is meant only for his/her understanding about our activities and who we are.
By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Cookie Policy.