Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 APRIL 2026

'Pisco' And Geographical Indications – A Recent Judicial Determination

Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan
Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan
Contributor
Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan

Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan

Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan (LKS) is a premier full-service Indian law firm specializing in areas...

View firm profile
Explore more from Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan

The recent judicial determination in the PISCO geographical indication dispute examines whether Peru can claim exclusive rights to the standalone term 'PISCO' for its alcoholic beverage, or whether both Peru and Chile's long-standing use of the term necessitates geographical qualifiers to prevent consumer confusion.

IndiaIntellectual Property

Factual Matrix

The South American Nation of Peru, through its Embassy in New Delhi, filed an application under Section 11 of the Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 19921 (‘Act’), seeking registration of the Geographical Indication (‘GI’) PISCO for an alcoholic beverage manufactured in Peru. The Asociacion De Productores De Pisco A.G. (‘ADP’) filed an opposition against Peru’s application.

The Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks, vide order dated 3 July 2009, granted registration of the GI ‘PERUVIAN PISCO’ in favour of Peru.

Aggrieved by the order, the Embassy of Peru (‘Peru’) preferred an appeal before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (‘IPAB’), which after due consideration ruled vide an Order dated 29 November 2018, in favour of Peru, holding that it was entitled to registration of the standalone GI PISCO for the alcoholic beverage manufactured by it.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from