The Adidas AG trademark, along with any other marks confusingly similar to it, are being used to prevent three local businesses, Adidas Weaving Mills, Adidas Textile Industries, and Adidas Merchandise, along with their directors, from producing, distributing, or dealing in textile goods under the ‘ADIDAS’ mark.
Although Adidas AG had requested damages totaling Rs 20 lakh from the three companies for their infringement, Judge Sanjeev Narula dismissed the former’s claim, ruling that it was only entitled to nominal damages of Rs 3 lakh because it “had not led any evidence to demonstrate the actual damages suffered by them resulting from the defendants’ infringing use.
The judge ruled that no hard proof of damages or exemplary expenses had been presented, with the exception of the testimony of one witness, who only asserted that Adidas AG was entitled to exemplary costs and damages. Additionally, as the defendants had refrained from taking part in the court proceedings from the point of leading their evidence, the ruling noted that there had been no seizure of infringing goods and that the German sportswear business was entitled to nominal damages of Rs 3 lakh.
Additionally, it granted Adidas AG an additional Rs 11.22 lakh to cover litigation fees and other expenses.
On a trademark infringement petition filed by Adidas, a producer and distributor of sportswear and accessories under the “ADIDAS” brand, a high court ruling was reached. It had claimed that the three domestic companies had started using the same term “ADIDAS” for their textiles business in “bad faith, with dishonest intent.