The Bombay High Court has delivered a landmark judgment in favour of Anheuser-Busch InBev (AB InBev), granting a permanent injunction against Madhya Pradesh-based Jagpin Breweries in a decade-long trademark battle over beer branding. The court ruled that Jagpin’s use of the name “COX 5001” for its beer amounted to passing off—a form of trademark infringement likely to mislead consumers about the source of the product.
Justice Arif Doctor, in his order last week, highlighted that the numeral component of the contested mark is critically similar to “Haywards 5000”, one of AB InBev’s most iconic and long-established beer brands in India. The judge noted that “the numeral 5001 is conceptually and visually similar to 5000, which constitutes the essential and prominent feature of the plaintiff’s (AB InBev’s) trademark.”
The court found that this resemblance could confuse an average consumer with imperfect recollection into believing that Jagpin’s product was connected to or originated from AB InBev. Given the immense goodwill attached to the Haywards 5000 brand, the risk of such confusion was judged to pose a real threat to the established trademark’s reputation. (ETRetail.com)
AB InBev, the world’s largest brewer and owner of the Haywards 5000 mark in India, first filed the lawsuit in 2012 against Jagpin Breweries, alleging that the latter’s mark sought to exploit market recognition of the well-known brand. The company argued that it had consistently enforced its rights by issuing cease-and-desist notices as far back as 2005 and pursuing legal remedies when non-compliance persisted.
Legal experts say this ruling reinforces trademark protection standards in India, particularly for brands with extensive historical use and consumer recognition. By affirming that even numerals closely associated with a famous mark can be protected if they create deceptive similarity, the judgment underscores the judiciary’s role in safeguarding established intellectual property rights against unfair competition.
The decision not only ends a protracted legal tussle but also bolsters confidence among brand owners about enforcement of well-known trademarks in India’s fast-evolving consumer market.
