Fidus Law Chambers Wins Benchmark Litigation Asia-Pacific "Impact Case Of The Year" For Landmark PISCO Geographical Indication Judgment

The award honours the firm's success in one of the world's longest-running geographical indication disputes concerning the spirit PISCO, a product claimed by both Chile and Peru. For decades, both countries have asserted competing historical and legal claims to the name across multiple jurisdictions. The Indian proceedings presented a novel question that had never before been decided by an Indian court: how should the law protect homonymous geographical indications - geographical indications that are identical in name but originate from different countries?

When Fidus Law Chambers assumed conduct of the matter, Chile had already suffered an adverse decision before the erstwhile Intellectual Property Appellate Board. Departing from the framework of geographical indication law, the IPAB had imported principles of trademark law, holding that Peru was the "prior adopter" of the term PISCO and was therefore entitled to exclusive registration of the geographical indication without the qualifying prefix "Peruvian", while characterising Chile's adoption of the name as dishonest.

Representing Chile, Fidus challenged that decision before the Delhi High Court, arguing before the Single Judge that the IPAB had exceeded its jurisdiction by applying trademark concepts to a statutory regime that is fundamentally different in purpose and operation. The firm further argued that both the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 and the TRIPS Agreement expressly contemplate the coexistence of homonymous geographical indications, permitting appropriate jurisdictional identifiers to distinguish products originating from different geographical regions.

In a landmark judgment, Justice Mini Pushkarna accepted these submissions, distinguishing the legal principles governing trademarks from those applicable to geographical indications and rejecting Peru's reliance on prior use and historical misappropriation. The judgment recognised that geographical indications protect geographical origin rather than proprietary rights in a word or sign, thereby permitting lawful coexistence where international obligations so require.

The victory was subsequently affirmed by the Division Bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla, which dismissed Peru's appeal and cemented the principles laid down by the Single Judge. It is this appellate victory that has now been recognised by Benchmark Litigation as an Impact Case of the Year.

The decision is widely regarded as India's first judicial pronouncement on homonymous geographical indications and is among only a handful of reported decisions globally addressing the subject, placing Indian jurisprudence alongside the internationally recognised Rioja dispute involving Spain and Argentina.

The matter was argued before both the Single Judge and the Division Bench by Shwetasree Majumder, Founder and Managing Partner of Fidus Law Chambers.

The litigation was led by Prithvi Singh, Partner, who coordinated the multidisciplinary effort required in a dispute involving intellectual property law, international treaty obligations, comparative jurisprudence and historical evidence. The core team included Rohan Seth, Managing Associate, together with the firm's associates, whose extensive legal and historical research contributed significantly to the successful outcome.

Commenting on the recognition, Shwetasree Majumder said:

"This dispute was never simply about a name. It required the Court to define the relationship between domestic geographical indication law, India's international obligations under TRIPS, and centuries of competing historical claims. We are deeply honoured that Benchmark Litigation has recognised the significance of this judgment and proud to have represented Chile in securing what has become a landmark decision in Indian intellectual property law."

Prithvi Singh, Partner, who was in Beijing to receive the award, added:

"This was a rare opportunity to shape an entirely new area of Indian GI jurisprudence. Successfully overturning the IPAB's decision and defending the judgment in appeal required an extraordinary team effort over several years. We are delighted that the matter has now received international recognition."

The decision is believed to be India's first judicial pronouncement on homonymous geographical indications and among the very few reported judicial decisions worldwide to comprehensively examine the doctrine.