The SUGAR-FREE Case: "Determination of Distinctiveness in Coined Terms"

Establishing 'distinctiveness' of coined words is tackled by Courts on a case-to case basis. While it is true that trademarks with unusual combinations or combination of words have traditionally enjoyed a higher degree of protection under the trademark law of India, the line between the 'usual' and the 'unusual' is getting thinner by the time.

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. & Ors' 2009 (41) PTC 336 (Del.) (DB) is a judgment of the Delhi high Court that deals with the issue of adjudicating the distinctiveness of a trademark when it is prima facie, 'descriptive' in character. In the case Cadila Healthcare Ltd. launched a product containing 'aspartame', a sugar substitute, under the brand name 'Sugar Free' in the year 1988. Cadila had allegedly coined and adopted the trademark 'Sugar Free' and were the first user of the said trademark in India. Gujarat Co-operative adopted a mark consisting of the words 'Sugar Free' for