38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, March 16, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Bombay High Court Gives Temporary Relief to Hindustan Unilever in Trademark Dispute [READ ORDER]

By Ghazal Bhootra      08 July, 2020 12:40 PM      0 Comments
BombayHC Hindustan Unilever Trademark

A one judge bench comprising of Justice BP Colabawalla adjudicated a hearing of an interim application filed by Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) via video conference under Section 142 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 that sought for an injunction against Emami from making baseless legal threats with regards to the use of its trademark Glow & Handsome.

In an interim relief to Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL), the company that had proclaimed it would rebrand its skin-lightening cream Fair & Lovely to Glow and Lovely and its skin cream for men will be called Glow and Handsome, the High Court of Bombay on July 6, 2020, restrained Emami Limited, the company that possessed the Fair and Handsome brand of products, from starting any legal proceedings against Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) without notice of the same at least 7 days or a week before the initiation.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) on July 2, 2020, had announced that it would rebrand its skin-lightening cream Fair & Lovely to Glow & Lovely, after criticism from netizens who claimed the name promoted negative stereotypes towards darker complexions, following the Black Lives Matter Movement that took place in the United States of America. Its skin cream for men will be called Glow & Handsome, Hindustan Unilever announced.

Senior Counsel Virag Tulzapurkar along with Advocate Hiren Kamod for the Hindustan Unilever (HUL) asked for an immediate hearing on July 6, 2020, and mentioned to the court that HUL was looking for an ad-interim relief that the defendant Emami Ltd should make sure that it gives written notice to HUL in advance it before initiating any legal proceedings in any court or claiming any interim relief against HUL as threatened in the statements made by it. HUL should get a notice 7 days in advance to the initiation of the legal proceedings, the interim relief sought.

The HUL explained in its statement that on September 7, 2018, it had coined and adopted the trademarks Glow & Lovely and Glow & Handsome for skincare products after searching the Register of Trademarks. HUL also went on to say that Emami gave statements in various newspapers threatening to seek legal action against the company for breaching rights with Emamis trademark Emami Glow and Handsome. Seeking an ad-interim relief against this publicized threat, the plaintiff HUL asked for an ex-parte order against Emamis threats.

Within a couple of hours of HUL announcing the new name, Emami termed HULs move as an unfair business practice. Emami director Mohan Goenka, who looks after the brand, told TOI, we will surely take legal action, was mentioned in the order as one of the publications of Emami threatening legal action as published by Times of India dated July 3, 2020.

After hearing submissions, Justice Colabawalla observed, Prima facie it does appear that having filed its trademark applications for the mark GLOW & HANDSOME, the Plaintiff (HUL) is the prior adopter of the said mark. The court postponed all the later hearings to July 27, 2020.

 

[READ ORDER]



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

tarun-holi-murder-case-delhi-police-पर-क्यों-नाराज़-हैं-पड़ोसी-law-street-journal
Trending Videos
Tarun Holi Murder Case: Delhi Police पर क्यों नाराज़ हैं पड़ोसी? || Law Street Journal

In this ground report on the Tarun Holi Murder Case, the team of Law Street Journal reaches Uttam Nagar, Delhi, where a shocking incident during Holi celebrations allegedly led to the death of a young man, Tarun. The dispute reportedly began after a Holi balloon thrown by a child accidentally hit a woman, which later escalated into a violent confrontation.

10 March, 2026 07:33 PM
itat-mumbai-deletes-1159-crore-addition-under-section-69a-brokers-papers-and-retracted-statement-held-insufficient
Trending Judiciary
ITAT Mumbai Deletes ₹11.59 Crore Addition Under Section 69A; Broker’s Papers and Retracted Statement Held Insufficient [Read Order]

Mumbai ITAT deletes ₹11.59 crore addition under Section 69A, holding broker’s papers and a retracted statement insufficient to prove alleged on-money receipts.

11 March, 2026 04:41 PM
prosecution-is-not-persecution-re-examining-the-constitutional-role-of-the-state-in-indias-criminal-justice-system-under-the-crpc-and-the-bnss
Trending Vantage Points
Prosecution is Not Persecution: Re-Examining the Constitutional Role of the State in India’s Criminal Justice System under the CrPC and the BNSS

Advocate Udit Arora examines how prosecution under CrPC and BNSS remains a constitutional duty—balancing justice, fairness, victim rights and protection of the innocent.

11 March, 2026 05:16 PM
sc-dismisses-mcgms-challenge-to-arbitral-award-holds-conduct-of-party-relevant-to-decide-jurisdictional-challenge
Trending Judiciary
SC Dismisses MCGM’s Challenge to Arbitral Award, Holds Conduct of Party Relevant to Decide Jurisdictional Challenge [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court dismisses MCGM’s challenge to arbitral award, holds party conduct relevant while deciding jurisdictional objections under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act.

13 March, 2026 12:31 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email