Abstract

Patent litigation in India is fraught with jurisdictional challenges and the strategic practice of forum shopping, which can significantly influence the outcomes of cases. This paper explores two primary loopholes in the Indian patent litigation system: different courts’ inconsistent application of jurisdictional rules and the overburdening of popular jurisdictions such as the Delhi High Court. These issues create an uneven playing field for litigants and strain the judicial system, leading to delays and inefficiencies. The inconsistent application of laws arises from different courts’ varying interpretations of jurisdictional rules. This inconsistency allows plaintiffs to exploit the system by choosing courts that are more likely to favour their cases. For instance, some courts may have a history of rulings that are more favourable to patent holders, while others may interpret jurisdictional rules in a manner that benefits the plaintiffs. This lack of uniformity undermines the predictability and fairness of the legal process, making it difficult for defendants to prepare their cases effectively. Overburdened courts, particularly the Delhi High Court, face a high volume of patent litigation cases, which can lead to significant delays. Plaintiffs often file cases in these courts to take advantage of their perceived expertise and favourable rulings. However, the high caseload can result in prolonged litigation, which plaintiffs can use strategically to pressure defendants into settlements. This not only affects the efficiency of the judicial system but also places an undue burden on certain courts, leading to a backlog of cases and delayed justice. The paper also examines the impact of these loopholes on the broader legal and business environment in India. Inconsistent rulings and delayed litigation can deter innovation and investment, as businesses may be wary of engaging in a system perceived as unpredictable and biased. Moreover, the concentration of cases in a few courts can lead to an uneven distribution of judicial resources, further exacerbating the problem. To address these issues, the paper suggests several reforms, including the standardization of jurisdictional rules across courts and the decentralization of patent litigation to distribute cases more evenly. By implementing these changes, the Indian legal system can enhance the predictability and fairness of patent litigation, reduce the burden on overworked courts, and create a more favourable environment for innovation and business. This research aims to shed light on the critical loopholes in the Indian patent litigation system and propose actionable solutions to improve the efficiency and fairness of the judicial process.

Keywords