Trap Purchases and Manufactured Jurisdiction in Indian IP Litigation A study of SML Ltd. v. M/s Happy Agro Chemicals and the doctrine of trap transactions Introduction In intellectual property disputes, few procedural issues matter as much as deciding where a case can be filed. The choice of court often shapes the entire journey of the case — from how quickly interim orders are granted, to the attitude of the local lawyers, to the practical burden placed on a defendant who must fight far from home. Because the forum is so important, plaintiffs sometimes try to influence it. The most common method is the trap purchase : a test buy arranged by the plaintiff, where an investigator pretends to be a regular customer, purchases the allegedly infringing product, and keeps the invoice and packaging. Later, this evidence is used not only to show infringement but — more controversially — to argue that the cause of action arose within the territory of the chosen court. Tra...
Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., the Indian arm of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., has challenged the constitutionality of India's customs regulations governing the import of goods suspected of infringing intellectual property rights, by filing a writ petition before the Delhi High Court. Samsung India was aggrieved by the action of the Indian Customs Department in withholding clearance of its imported dual-SIM-card mobile phones, pursuant to an application filed by a patentee claiming rights over similar technology with the customs office. Specifically, Samsung India challenged Customs Notification No. 47/2007-Customs (N.T.), dated May 8, 2007—titled the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 —read together with Customs Circular No. 41/2007, dated October 29, 2007, titled Instructions for Implementation of the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 , issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. Under these pro...