Many of us may have occasionally faced challenges convincing lower courts on the issue of exempting pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

The Supreme Court’s recent judgment in 𝗡𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗼 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗔/𝗦 𝘃. 𝗫𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗘𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗣𝘃𝘁. 𝗟𝘁𝗱. & 𝗔𝗻𝗿. has now brought much-needed clarity, especially in the context of Intellectual Property disputes.

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗸𝗲𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻:

𝗧𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗗𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗨𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭𝟮𝗔:

 The plaint and accompanying documents must, on a wholesome reading, disclose the need for urgent relief.

 The Court will assess whether there is immediacy of harm, e.g., perishable subject matter, risk to assets, or potential ineffectiveness of delayed relief.

 A mere prayer for urgent relief isn’t enough; the court must be convinced of the urgency.

 Whether or not the plaintiff ultimately succeeds in getting interim relief is immaterial, what matters is whether the relief sought, is of urgent nature.

 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗢𝗯𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀:

-A delay in filing (unless statutory) doesn’t defeat the right to seek injunctions, since infringement and passing off are continuing causes of action.

-Where the goods in question impact public interest, the need for immediate judicial intervention becomes even stronger.

This judgment provides much-needed guidance and consistency in handling Section 12A compliance, particularly for IP practitioners.