Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) has increased legal action against intellectual property rights (IPR) and trademark violations, filing about two cases per week in fiscal year 2019. This signals an aggressive effort to curb counterfeit products that copy HUL brand logos and packaging or use similar names. In recent examples, HUL sued a Gujarat-based soap company for copying its Wheel washing powder brand and a Navi Mumbai cosmetics firm for imitating its Vaseline and Fair & Lovely brands. Legal experts say HUL's move to promptly pursue legal action against both small companies and third-party manufacturers demonstrates a phenomenal effort to strongly protect its intellectual property.

1. HINDUSTAN UNILIVER LIMITED
Students Name- Roll No-
• Anushka Gupta 2019-2409-0001-0003
• Neha Thaakre 2019-2409-0001-0001
• Shivam Jadhav 2019-2309-0001-0005
• Manish Patil 2019-2309-0001-0006
Class- MBA Section-5
Assignment no- 1
Submitted to- Mr. Animesh Kumar.

2. INTRODUCTION TO HUL
• Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) is India's largest Fast Moving Consumer Goods company with a
heritage of over 80 years in India. On any given day, nine out of ten Indian households use our products
to feel good, look good and get more out of life – giving us a unique opportunity to build a brighter
future.
• HUL works to create a better future every day and helps people feel good, look good and get more out of
life with brands and services that are good for them and good for others.
• With over 35 brands spanning 20 distinct categories such as soaps, detergents, shampoos, skin care,
toothpastes, deodorants, cosmetics, tea, coffee, packaged foods, ice cream, and water purifiers, the
Company is a part of the everyday life of millions of consumers across India. Its portfolio includes
leading household brands such as Lux, Lifebuoy, Surf Excel, Rin, Wheel, Fair & Lovely, Pond’s, Vaseline,
Lakmé, Dove, Clinic Plus, Sunsilk, Pepsodent, Closeup, Axe, Brooke Bond, Bru, Knorr, Kissan, Kwality
Wall’s and Pureit.
• The Company has about 18,000 employees and has sales of INR 37660 crores (financial year 2018-19).
HUL is a subsidiary of Unilever, one of the world’s leading suppliers of Food, Home Care, Personal Care
and Refreshment products with sales in over 190 countries and an annual sales turnover of €51 billion

3. Segments in which HUL work-

4. HUL CSR ACTIVITY
Project Shakti- Project Shakti is
an initiative to financially
empower rural women and
create livelihood opportunities
for them.
Sustainable Sourcing of Tomatoes-
8,000 smallholder farmers grow
tomatoes on more than 11,000
acres of land in Maharashtra.
Asha Daan- HUL-supported
home for abandoned, specially-
abled children, HIV-positive
people and the destitute.

5. Lamplighter Programme- Our
medical and occupational health
programme aims to improve the
nutrition, fitness and mental
resilience of employees.
Suvidha- HUL has always been at
the forefront of providing
innovative solutions to the health
and hygiene challenges faced by
the less privileged section of the
society.
Project Prabhat- Prabhat’ is a
USLP-linked programme which
contributes to the development of
local communities around key HUL
sites.
Start a little good- At HUL, we
believe that if we all start doing
our bit of good, we can together
make the world a better place.

6. CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
• The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (COPRA) is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted in 1986 to
protect the interests of consumers in India. It is made for the establishment of consumer councils and other
authorities for the settlement of consumer's grievances and for matters connected there with it. The act was
passed in Assembly in October 1986 and came into force on December 24, 1986.This statute was made
before this act."
• What are Consumer Protection Councils? The Act provides for establishment of Consumer Protection
Councils at Centre, State and District levels. The purpose of these Councils are to review consumer
related policies of the government and suggest measures for further improvements for protecting and
promoting rights of the consumers. The composition of these councils is broad based. The Minister
Incharge of Consumer Affairs in the Centre is the Chairman of the Central Consumer Protection
Council and it has other official and non-official members. The State Consumer Protection Council is
headed by Minister In-charge of Consumer Affairs in the State and the District Consumer Protection
Council is headed by the Collector of the District. These Councils are advisory in nature and their
object is to protect the rights of the consumers enshrined under the Act.

7. AS PER “CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 1986”
CASE OF HUL-
• Vaibhav Bedi, 26 years old resident of new Delhi filled a case against
the Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (HUL) in consumer court regarding
cheating and mental harassment via companies product ‘AXE deo’.

8. IN THIS CASE-
• Hindustan Unilever Ltd is a reputed company in FMCG sector having wide variety of its product.
Company also groom the deodorant industry with the help of its sub brand ‘AXE’. Company went for
advertisement showing the craziness of girls towards the AXE deo and AXE deo applied man. And create
a good will by saying that attraction of girls after applying the AXE deo is called ‘AXE effect’. With this
company also introduce products like deo, after shaving lotion, shower gel etc.
• Vaibhav bedi a resident of New Delhi also wanted to get centre of attraction in the mind of girls and as
per the companies all instruction he started using all the products which comes under the sub brand of
‘AXE’. He used the AXE product for nearly 7 years as per the company’s prescription but as per the
advertisement presentation, no girl turned up for him in real life.
• Vaibhav claims that he had been using all the Axe products as per the company’s instructions even since
he first bought them. He argued that if he couldn’t experience the Axe effect despite using the products as
directed, either the company was making false claims or selling fake products.
• With these complaints Vaibhav filed a suit against Hindustan Unilever Ltd. with the argument that
company made a false statement through advertisement which resulted in to cheating and mental
harassment he also surrendered used can of AXE as an evidence in consumer court.
• As per the consumer protection act. 1986, company made an false statement via advertisement which
miss guided the consumer and spread an different message in order to have a better sell but here, this
message is harmful for customer like Vaibhav Bedi. So by using the rights of consumer, vaibhav Bedi
surrendered all his used cans and claimed for compensation from Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (HUL)

9. COMPANIES ACT-
• The Companies Act 2013 is an Act of the Parliament of India on Indian company
law which regulates incorporation of a company, responsibilities of a company,
directors, dissolution of a company. The 2013 Act is divided into 29 chapters
containing 470 sections as against 658 Sections in the Companies Act, 1956 and has
7 schedules. The Act has replaced The Companies Act, 1956 (in a partial manner)
after receiving the assent of the President of India on 29 August 2013. A new term
of "one-person company" is included in this act.
• The Transferor Company was incorporated on 17th October, 1933 under the
provisions of the Indian Companies Act, VII of 1913 as "Lever Brothers (India)
Private Limited". The name of the Company was changed to "Hindustan Lever
Limited" on 1st November, 1956 and was changed to its present name on 11th June,
2007

10. Certificate of
incorporation of
HUL

11. ACCORDING TO COMPANIES ACT CHANGES
MADE IN HUL-
• The Chairman informed that the Company had provided the facility of the facility of e-voting to its
Shareholders to exercise their right to vote on the Resolutions proposed to be passed at the AGM. The
Chairman requested Mr. Dev Bajpai to brief the Members about the voting procedure at the AGM.
• Mr. Bajpai informed the Shareholders that as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 as also the
Listing Agreement, the Company had provided the facility of remote e-voting to the Shareholders to
enable them to cast their vote electronically. The remote e-voting was open from 25th June, 2015 to 28th
June, 2015. He also informed that in line with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, voting by ‘Show
of Hands’ was not permitted at the general meeting where e-voting has been offered to the Shareholders.
Therefore, the arrangements had been made for conducting e- voting for the Shareholders at the venue of
the meeting. He further informed that the Members attending the AGM who had not cast their vote by
remote e- voting were eligible to vote at the AGM.
• Mr. Bajpai stated that the Shareholders, who had not cast their vote through remote e-voting process,
were provided with e-vote key which is One Time Password (i.e. OTP) to: cast their vote. He further
informed that Mr. S. N. Ananthasubramanian, Practicing Company Secretary was appointed as the
Scrutinizer for the e-voting process. Thereafter, a short film demonstrating the manner and procedure for
e-voting was played for the shareholders.

12. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
• Intellectual property rights are the rights given to persons over the
creations of their minds. They usually give the creator an exclusive right
over the use of his/her creation for a certain period of time. Lawmakers
believe that it’s fair for creators to profit from their own work product.

13. IPR & TRADEMARK VIOLATION: HUL STEPS UP
LEGAL ACTION TO CURB COUNTERFEIT MENACE
• MUMBAI: Hindustan Unilever, the country’s biggest pure-play consumer goods firm, has averaged
filing about two cases of violation of its intellectual property rights (IPR) and trademarks weekly in
FY19, signalling a vigorous attempt to crack down on counterfeit products that use similar logos or
packaging as HULNSE 0.41 % brands and sold at knockdown prices.
In March, HUL approached the Bombay High Court against Mahadev Soap Factory, a firm from Bardoli
near Surat, alleging trademark violation. HUL claimed the Gujarat-based firm’s washing powder brand
‘Go-Win’ had packaging identical to its mass-market washing powder brand ‘Wheel.’ Ditto in the case of
Navi Mumbai-based Glint Cosmetics that manufactured and sold products under the brands ‘Fasaline’
and ‘Fair & Life’, similar to HUL’s brands ‘Vaseline’ and ‘Fair & Lovely.’ “HUL’s recent move of taking
prompt legal action against not only small companies but third-party manufacturers to protect its IPR
is phenomenal,” said Priyanka Sinha, co-founder of Mumbai-based law firm A&P Partners. “You don’t
see firms of that size adopting such aggressive methods. One of the many reasons is that not many
firms have deep pockets like HUL to implement such robust systems and processes.”

14. • For the past several years, HUL has been working to remove fake items from retail shelves, independently and through
several industry bodies. About six years ago, HUL set up a dedicated team of 20 brand protection specialists spread
across five major cities and headed by a retired colonel from the Indian Army.
Industry estimates suggest that 7-10% of all products sold in the Rs 3 lakh crore FMCG (fast-moving consumer goods)
market in India are counterfeit. That’s over Rs 21,000- 30,000 crore of loss in sales for branded products each year. This
is despite strong laws to regulate the infringement of IPR. As part of its advocacy, HUL also engages with the customs
departments across the ports, which seized fake goods worth Rs 60 crore being imported from China last year “We don’t
shy away from filing a suit wherever we feel it is a fit case for getting orders based on our investigation,” said Bajpai,
adding that it starts with the surveillance, progressing into investigation and then results in action pursuant to us
getting a court order.
• “Various laws, including the Trade Marks Act, Copyright Act and the IPR Enforcement Rules of the Customs have some
rough edges and HUL is working with the government, through industry forums, to smoothen it out. If some of the
provisions of the above enactments are suitably amended, actions against counterfeiters can be more effective,” Bajpai
said.
• HUL isn’t alone. Over the past few years, there have been several petitions filed with the courts by brands and
consumers of fake products. As ecommerce picked up pace and consumers shed their initial apprehensions about
purchasing online, foreign companies have seen a significant rise in fakes being sold on various ecommerce sites.
Companies including L’Oréal, Tommy Hilfiger, Lacoste, Calvin Klein, Levi's and Superdry have helped confiscate
thousands of fake apparels through court-aide raids on warehouses, owned by either sellers or smaller niche fashion
portals, over the past three years.

15. CASE OF HUL REGARDING NOT
EXEMPTING OF EXCESS TAX-
• National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA), said consumer goods maker Hindustan
Unilever Ltd (HUL) has allegedly profiteered to the extent of ₹ 383 crore after the large
scale goods and services tax (GST) rate cut last November.
• An order from the NAA posted on its website said that, after allowing for certain
deductions, the confirmed amount of tax benefit that the company has not passed on to
consumers was assessed at ₹ 383 crore. NAA asked HUL to deposit ₹ 223 crore in central
and state consumer welfare funds as the company had proactively deposited ₹ 160 crore
with the central consumer welfare fund, set up under the anti-profiteering laws.
• The NAA order indicates vigilance on the part of the authorities in ensuring that the
benefit of tax cuts are passed on to consumers.