The Supreme Court on Friday chose not to intervene in a high-stakes intellectual property battle involving Crocs Inc. USA and several Indian footwear giants. A Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed the petitions filed by Bata India and Liberty Shoes, clearing the way for the long-pending passing off suits to proceed before the Delhi High Court.
Background
The dispute traces back to Crocs’ allegation that a number of Indian manufacturers reproduced the familiar look of its foam clogs the rounded shape, the cut-out ventilation pattern, and the overall configuration. Crocs has always maintained that these features are not just ornamental but form its trade dress, the visual identity that signals the brand to consumers.
Back in 2019, a single judge had thrown out all six suits at the initial stage, concluding that Crocs could not rely on passing off, since the very features it claimed were already protected under a registered design. Under Indian law, design protection lasts only for a limited period.
But in July 2025, a Division Bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul revived the suits, emphasising that Crocs claims needed a full trial. This prompted the fresh challenge before the Supreme Court.
Court's Observations
The Supreme Court, however, saw no compelling reason to interfere. The judges kept the discussion crisp. At one point, Justice Kumar remarked that the earlier order merely restored the suits; it did not declare Crocs the winner.
“The bench observed, ‘These matters must be examined by the trial court without being influenced by prior remarks.’”
Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for Bata and other companies, argued that allowing Crocs to rely on passing off would effectively give it endless protection over a design that the law intends to keep time-limited. But the Bench noted that previous decisions particularly the Full Bench ruling in Carlsberg Breweries recognised that design infringement and passing off are not mutually exclusive claims.
On the opposite side, Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, representing Crocs, asserted that passing off is a separate remedy based on goodwill and consumer recognition. He said Crocs’ distinctive clogs gained their reputation over years and had been widely imitated, creating confusion in the market.
According to him,
“Passing off protects the identity built through user, not registration.”
Decision
Concluding the hearing, the Supreme Court dismissed all petitions filed by Bata and Liberty. It directed that the Delhi High Court’s single judge should continue hearing the suits independently, without being swayed by any observation of the Division Bench or even the Supreme Court. The Bench also left open the broader legal question regarding how passing off interacts with design protection.
With the dismissal, the decade-old Crocs suits now head back to the trial court finally poised to move forward after years of procedural roadblocks.
Case Details:-
- Bata India Ltd. & Ors. vs. Crocs Inc. USA
- SLP(C) No. 29920–29924/2025
- Liberty Shoes Ltd. vs. Crocs Inc. USA
- SLP(C) No. 32834/2025
