Whose Frappuccino is it anyway? Delhi High Court awards Starbucks ₹2 lakh damages, ₹9 lakh costs

The Delhi High Court recently awarded Starbucks Corporation damages and costs to the tune of ₹2 lakh and ₹9 lakh respectively, in a trademark infringement suit filed by the international coffee chain over the use of it's registered trademark 'frappuccino'. (Starbucks Corporation v. Teaquila A Fashion Cafe & Anr)..Justice Jyoti Singh observed that Starbucks' 'frappuccino' trademarks have acquired a formidable reputation and goodwill in India and that the defendants have used identical marks with respect to similar goods, trade channels and customer base, thereby satisfying the triple identity test.Therefore, the Court held that the defendant had infringed on the 'frappucino' trademark. "Ex-consequenti, it is proved by the Plaintiff that use of the impugned marks by the Defendants amounts to infringement of Plaintiff’s FRAPPUCCINO trademarks. It is also proved that the intent of the Defendants was to pass off their goods as that of the Plaintiff and a case of passing off is also established. It needs no reiteration that the pleadings in the plaint and evidence led by the Plaintiff are unrebutted and thus, accepted as true and correct. Plaintiff has made out a case for grant of permanent injunction in terms of prayers (a) and (b) in para 47 of the plaint," the Court said in its judgment in favour of Starbucks. .The Court was dealing with a suit filed by Starbucks Corporation alleging that a Jaipur-based café called Teaquila: A Fashion Cafe was engaging in infringing its registered trademark 'frappuccino'. Therefore, Starbucks sought a permanent injunction against the defendant café from using the 'frappuccino' trademark, either alone or with any prefix or suffix; or any other confusing and deceptively similar trademark in relation to their goods, services and business.Starbucks also prayed for an award of damages and delivery of the concerned goods, menu cards, etc. It was argued on behalf of Starbucks that 'frappuccino' is a well-known trademark under section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, on account of extensive use, global presence, trademark registrations in foreign jurisdictions and in India..After hearing the arguments, the Court noted that that one of the defendants was selling and serving beverages under the names ‘Butterscotch Frappuccino’ and 'Hazelnut Frappuccino’, without Starbucks's permission, authorization or license."The marks used by the Defendants are phonetically and visually identical to the Plaintiff’s FRAPPUCCINO mark and the names of the beverages are confusingly and conceptually similar to one of the Plaintiff’s hand-crafted beverage items ‘SMOKED BUTTERSCOTCH FRAPPUCCINO’ and ‘HAZELNUT FRAPPUCCINO BLENDED COFFEE," the Court held in this regard. .Relying on its own judgment in Indian Performing Right Society v. Debashis Patnaik, the Court said that it cannot lose sight of the fact that when the defendants have been found guilty of infringement, it can grant notional damages.Accordingly, damages to the tune of ₹2 lakh were awarded in favour of Starbucks.Additionally, the Court also ordered that costs worth ₹ 9,60,100 must be paid to Starbucks Corporation as they had filed this amount in the advocates’ fee certificate, which included the fee of the lawyers and the court fee..Advocates Priya Adlakha and Rima Majumdar appeared for Starbucks. .[Read Judgment]