High Courts

Graham and Co. vs Kerr, Dods and Co.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 14 June 1869 · Citation: (1869) 06 CAL CK 0034

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 76 words

Phear, J.—It is not enough to say that there was no fraudulent intention. That is no reason why an injunction should not be granted. I do not think I have any option if the marks, which defendants have used, are those of the plaintiffs; no matter what their intention was, a perpetual injunction would be granted. In the meantime an interlocutory injunction must issue. Obviously there is a close imitation. Interlocutory injunction to issue with costs.