Delhi HC Orders Restoration of BLUE-JAY Trademark

The Delhi High Court recently ordered restoration of the BLUE-JAY mark, belonging to partners of a New Delhi-based firm, to the Register of Trade Marks, rejecting the claim that the mark of the Canada-based baseball club Toronto Blue Jays enjoyed trans-border goodwill and reputation in India.

On a Section 57 petition filed by the proprietor of the BLUE JAYS and TORONTO BLUE JAYS word and device marks, the Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court had, vide decision dated July 1, 2025, ordered the registered BLUE-JAY trade mark to be struck off from the Register of Trade Marks. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has now set aside this decision of the Single Judge Bench.

In its judgment dated January 5, 2026, the Division Bench held that no case had been made out for the removal of the BLUE-JAY mark from the Register, under Section 57(2) read with Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Key observations made by the Court are summarised below:

• Regarding alleged similarity to earlier trademark: The Court held that the BLUE JAYS mark did not qualify as an “earlier trade mark” under Sections 11(1) and 11(2).
• Existence of goodwill – sine qua non of passing off action: Playing reliance on the territoriality doctrine, the Court noted that the acquisition of a global reputation was irrelevant, unless the reputation had percolated into India. It concluded that there was no material to indicate the existence of goodwill or reputation of the BLUE JAYS mark in India, prior to August 19, 1998 (when the appellants applied for registration of the BLUE-JAY mark); consequently, no case for cancellation owing to passing off under Section 11(3)(a) had been made out.
• Bad faith adoption: The Court held that no case had been made out to show that the adoption of the BLUE-JAY mark by the appellants was tainted with bad faith to render the mark liable to be cancelled under Section 11(10)(ii). It reasoned that the explanation tendered by the appellants for adopting the BLUE-JAY mark in their counter statement before the Trade Mark Registry, and in response to the Section 57 petition, was not contradictory.

With this, the Court allowed the appeal and ordered restoration of the BLUE-JAY mark to the Register of Trade Marks.