The Doctrine Of Approbate And Reprobate In Indian Trade Mark Jurisprudence:
The Doctrine Of Approbate And Reprobate In Indian Trade Mark Jurisprudence: A Critical Examination Of Contradictory Pleadings, Shifting User Claims, Distinctiveness Defences And The Operation Of Equitable Estoppel
Swati Agrawal, Amity University, Madhya Pradesh
Dr. Arun Sharma, Associate Professor at Amity University Madhya Pradesh
I. INTRODUCTION
"This Court wants to make it clear that an action at law is not a game of chess. A litigant who comes to Court and invokes its writ jurisdiction must come with clean hands. He cannot prevaricate and take inconsistent positions" - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly & Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi in Amar Singh v. Union of India
The Latin maxim "Quod approbo non reprobo" meaning “that which I approve, I cannot disapprove” comprehensively captures the essence of all that the Doctrine of Approbate and Reprobate stands for.
The Doctrine of Approbate and Reprobate traces its origination with the development of legal systems world-wide. The doctrine of approbate and reprobate, which had been shaped by the Court of Chancery and refined through successive pronouncements of the House of Lords, the Privy Council and, in due course, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, while started off as an unwritten practice, eventually hardened into a cardinal rule of judicial conduct.
Even where the terms ‘Approbate’ or ‘Reprobate’ have not been used, the courts have used terminology such as “blow hot and cold”, “play fast and loose”, to constantly deter litigants and parties from adopting mutually destructive positions, basis their convenience. The doctrine prohibits parties or litigants from acting in contradictory ways to simultaneously enjoy the benefit of a position while repudiating its burden.
