Delhi High Court Restrains Cosmetic Company From Copying Visage Beauty's O3+ Facial Kits Packaging And Mark

In a clash over look-alike facial kits, the Delhi High Court has granted Visage Beauty an interim injunction restraining Freecia Professional India from copying its packaging layout, usage instructions, ingredients text and from using the trademark 'DERMOMELAN'. A single bench of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora passed the order on November 21 while hearing Visage Beauty & Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.'s suit alleging trademark and copyright infringement of its O3+ facial kits.Visage told the court that it has registered and widely marketed its marks D-TAN, DERMOMELAN and SHINE & GLOW, and built substantial goodwill through sales and advertising. It produced side-by-side comparisons to show that Freecia's 'Proads' facial kits carried almost identical wording of the ingredients lists and “steps to use”, along with a strikingly similar packaging layout. Visage argued that this amounted to copying of its literary work and overall trade dress. Freecia initially filed a written response but later stopped appearing, prompting the Court to proceed ex-parte. In its defence, the company had claimed that phrases such as D-TAN and descriptive expressions like “shine & glowing” were widely used in the industry, and that the manner of listing ingredients and usage steps was common commercial practice rather than original creative expression. It also said the presence of its own mark 'PROADS' on the packaging reduced any possibility of confusion. After reviewing the products, the court found that Freecia had, prima facie, copied Visage's packaging layout and the wording of the “ingredients” and “steps to use.” It said the comparisons showed clear similarity, and Freecia had not convincingly shown that such wording was common in the industry. It said “However, having perused the comparison of the 'ingredients' and 'steps to use' as well as the layout between the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1's product, this Court is satisfied that prima facie Defendant No. 1 has substantially copied the same from the Plaintiff's product. The submissions of the Defendant No. 1 that the 'steps to use' and 'ingredients' are as per industry practice has not been substantiated.” On the claim that DERMOMELAN, has prior usage, the court rejected Freecia's reliance on a single foreign brand said to use the term DERMOMELAN, holding that this did not justify adopting Visage's registered mark. It added that the appearance of the term within Freecia's usage instructions indicated slavish copying. “The Defendant No. 1's action of using the mark 'DERMOMELAN' in the ingredients, in fact, it appears to the Court as evidence that the Defendant No. 1 while slavishly copying the Plaintiff's packaging has included this word in its 'steps to use'. The Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the mark 'DERMOMELAN'. Therefore, Defendant No. 1 is refrained from using this mark in any manner whatsoever.”, the Court said. Concluding that Visage had made out a strong prima facie case for protection, the Court restrained Freecia and its associated entities from copying the packaging layout, ingredient descriptions, usage steps or using the mark 'DERMOMELAN' until the final disposal of the suit. Case Title: Visage Beauty and Healthcare Private Limited v. Freecia Professional India Private Limited & Anr.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1579 Case Number: CS(COMM) 633/2022 For the Plaintiffs: Advocates Vaibhav Vutts, Aamna Hasan and Aarya DeshmukhClick Here To Read/Download Order

Delhi High Court Restrains Cosmetic Company From Copying Visage Beauty's O3+ Facial Kits Packaging And Mark

Aayushi Shukla

Tags