Listen to this post

Overview

As envisaged in the IT Policy of 2023[1] (2023 IT Policy), Maharashtra Government, in accordance with the powers vested in it under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act on February 1, 2024[2], issued the much awaited notification (2024 Notification) on full or partial waiver of stamp duty available to eligible new and expansion diversification units or projects, relating to Information Technology (IT), Information Technology Enable Services (ITES), Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming and Comics (AVGC) units, Data centres and Emerging Technology Units, (collectively IT/ITES Unit). The 2024 Notification is valid from June 27, 2023, to June 26, 2028, (both days inclusive) or for the currency of the 2013 IT Policy.

Continue Reading Stamp Duty Exemption Under IT/ ITES Policy, 2023
Listen to this post

Employer safeguards in the wake of ‘Loud Quitting’

In the ever-evolving landscape of professional dynamics, a recent trend has emerged where employees have been publicly expressing their dissatisfaction and grievances with their employers after resigning from their jobs, often through social media platforms. This phenomenon has been termed as ‘loud quitting’. This practice marks a stark shift from the previous subtle ways that employees chose to express dissatisfaction about their work environments.

Continue Reading Employer safeguards in the wake of ‘Loud Quitting’
Listen to this post
DB of DHC sets the contours of Pre-grant opponent in an examination process

In a recent case[1], Novartis AG[2] v. Natco Pharma Ltd.[3], the Division Bench (DB) of the Delhi High Court (DHC) adjudicated on the extent of engagement a pre-grant opponent should be allowed under the Patents Act, 1970, in the course of proceedings initiated by the Controller, requiring the patent applicant to amend or modify the patent application.

Continue Reading DB of DHC sets the contours of Pre-grant opponent in an examination process
Listen to this post
Linking Patents to Pills: Unravelling the Patent Linkage Framework for Pharmaceutical Products in India

A patent grants the patentee exclusive rights, title, and interest in an invention. This creates a right in rem – a right to restrict a third party from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or in any manner commercializing the invention (as claimed in the patent)[1] for a period of 20 years[2]. In case of drugs, grant of patent, does not give the patent owner an automatic right to market the product. Such additional right in the form of a marketing approval/ license/ registration is granted by the concerned drug regulatory body acting under the auspices of the relevant legislation that regulates the import/ manufacture/ sale/ marketing of the drug in the relevant jurisdiction.

Continue Reading Linking Patents to Pills: Unravelling the Patent Linkage Framework for Pharmaceutical Products in India
Listen to this post
Institutionalising public consultations: A step towards building a stakeholder-friendly regulatory threshold

Introduction

 The ‘Draft Policy for Pre-Legislative consultation and comprehensive review of existing Rules and Regulations’, released by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (“MCA”), became effective from January 1, 2024 (“MCA-PLCP”). This move complements the increased focus on improving the ‘ease of doing business’ across regulators in India[1] and will also help address the inherent non-uniformity in the consultative mechanisms and processes employed by various MCA-formed/governed regulatory bodies.

Continue Reading Institutionalising public consultations: A step towards building a stakeholder-friendly regulatory threshold
Listen to this post

Background

The European Court of Justice (“CJEU”) in mid-2023 passed a landmark judgment in Meta Platforms Inc. v. Bundeskartellamt[1], by imposing strict restrictions on social media entities using personal data of consumer’s for targeting them with personalised advertisements through their platforms. This ruling struck at the core revenue model of many big technology organisations.   

Continue Reading The Great Reset: What Lies in Store for Targeted Advertising?  
Listen to this post
FIG Paper (No. 34 – Data Law Series 5) Balancing Sectoral Regulation and DPDP Act Compliance by NBFCs & Fintechs

Background

Indian regulators in recent times have shown a keen interest in monitoring the intersection between data, information technology, and cybersecurity with regulated entities—more so in relation to Non-Banking Financial Companies (“NBFCs”) and ‘fintechs’. With the expected enforcement of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (“DPDP Act”), and the promulgation of its rules, it becomes imperative for NBFCs and fintechs to map their journey of compliance from legal and regulatory perspectives.

Continue Reading FIG Paper (No. 34 – Data Law Series 5) Balancing Sectoral Regulation and DPDP Act Compliance by NBFCs & Fintechs
Listen to this post
‘Technical Breach’ not a contravention of Section 39 of the Patents Act?

In Selfdot Technologies (OPC) Pvt. Ltd. v. Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trademarks, [order dated November 28, 2023],the Madras High Court has adjudicated on Section 39 and 40 of the Indian Patents Act and held that the breach committed by the appellant was a technical breach and cannot be considered a contravention of Section 39 of the Patents Act, 1970, and hence cannot trigger deemed abandonment under Section 40.

Continue Reading ‘Technical Breach’ not a contravention of Section 39 of the Patents Act?
Listen to this post
Court interprets “known substance” in respect of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act

In an important decision, Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, discussed Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970.[1] The case involved a patent application no. 7096/CHENP/2015, which claimed priority from the US application number 61/815,502 dated 24 April 2013. The patent application claimed two polymorphic forms—A and B—of a compound RTA-408. Compound RTA-048 was claimed and granted in the Indian Patent Application No. 8486/DELNP/2014.[2] The patent application 7096/CHENP/2015 was refused essentially on the grounds of being not patentable under Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act.

Continue Reading Court interprets “known substance” in respect of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act
Listen to this post
Substantial Issues in Defining “Substantially the Whole of the Undertaking”

Section 180(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2013 (“2013 Act”) requires a company to obtain prior approval by a special resolution to sell, lease or dispose of the whole or substantially the whole of the undertaking of the company or, when the company owns more than one undertaking, of the whole or substantially the whole of any of such  undertakings.

Continue Reading Substantial Issues in Defining “Substantially the Whole of the Undertaking”