Uganda Case Law

Elite Gold Limited v Indo-Bali Distributors Limited (032264; 043533; Trademark Registration 45697 of 2024)

Elite Gold Limited v Indo-Bali Distributors Limited (032264; 043533; Trademark Registration 45697 of 2024) [2025] UGRSB 6 (1 April 2025)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

032264 ; 043533 ; Trademark Registration 45697 of 2024

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

The Registrar found that jurisdiction to cancel trademarks based on prior foreign registration under section 45 of the Trademarks Act lies exclusively with the High Court, not the Registrar. The applicant failed to prove fraud or bad faith by the Respondent in registering the disputed trademarks. The Respondent's actions were consistent with the principle of territoriality, as the applicant had no trademark protection in Uganda at the time of registration. The applicant's allegations of fraud and bad faith were not sufficiently particularized or supported by evidence. The Registrar concluded…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Registration
• Bad Faith In Trademark
• Fraud In Trademark Registration
• Territoriality Principle
• Trademark Cancellation
• Registrar Jurisdiction

Uganda Young Men’s Christian Association v World Alliance of Young Men’s Christian Associations (Trademark Registration 68118 of 2020)

Uganda Young Men’s Christian Association v World Alliance of Young Men’s Christian Associations (Trademark Registration 68118 of 2020) [2025] UGRSB 7 (1 April 2025)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Registration 68118 of 2020

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

The Registrar cancelled TM 68118 for YMCA, finding it was registered in error because an earlier application for the same mark and services was already pending.

• Trademark Registration
• Rectification Of Register
• Priority Of Application
• Territoriality Principle
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Cancellation Proceedings

Afroludo Limited v Uganda Registration Services Bureau & Another

Afroludo Limited v Uganda Registration Services Bureau & Another (Civil Suit 262 of 2022) [2025] UGHCCD 18 (14 February 2025)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit 262 of 2022

Judge

Musa Ssekaana, J

The court found that the 1st defendant's rejection of the plaintiff's trademark application was illegal, irrational, and unfair, as it relied on an imported and unreliable interpretation of the word 'Nyege' rather than its meaning in the local context where the festival is held. The 1st defendant failed to exercise its discretionary power fairly and consistently. The 2nd defendant's registration of the business name 'Nyege Nyege Music Festival' was found to be fraudulent and misleading, as it was done with knowledge of the plaintiff's established reputation and with the intent to cause confus…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Registration
• Business Name Registration
• Passing Off
• Registrar Discretion
• Public Policy And Morality

Modino Furniture Company Limited v Homeart Uganda Limited and Another (Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019)

Modino Furniture Company Limited v Homeart Uganda Limited and Another (Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019) [2024] UGCommC 325 (11 October 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020 ; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019

Judge

Abinyo, J

The court held that Modino Furniture Company Limited is the lawful and registered proprietor of the DOGTAS trademark in Uganda, having complied with all statutory requirements for registration. The Defendants failed to object to the Plaintiff's registration or apply for local protection, and international registration does not confer automatic rights in Uganda. The Defendants' use of the DOGTAS mark without authorization from the registered owner constitutes trademark infringement under Ugandan law. The franchise agreement between the Defendants is inconsequential in the absence of local regi…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Registration
• Trademark Infringement
• International Trademark Protection
• Franchise Agreements
• Territorial Principle
• Remedies For Infringement

Benson & Hedges (Overseas) Limited v B & Foto Electronics Corp (Trademark Application 39465 of 2004)

Benson & Hedges (Overseas) Limited v B & Foto Electronics Corp (Trademark Application 39465 of 2004) [2024] UGRSB 12 (21 June 2024)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Application 39465 of 2004

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

The Registrar dismissed an opposition to “B & H” in class 9, holding that the applicant’s electronics goods were unlike the opponent’s tobacco products.

• Trademark Registration
• Well Known Marks
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Defensive Registration
• Trademark-opposition
• Well-known-marks

Nanoomal Issardas Motiwala (U) Limited v Himalaya Global Holdings Limited (Trademark Application 40921 of 2010)

Nanoomal Issardas Motiwala (U) Limited v Himalaya Global Holdings Limited (Trademark Application 40921 of 2010) [2024] UGRSB 13 (12 June 2024)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Application 40921 of 2010

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

Opposition to registration of EVECARE in class 5 succeeded because the mark was found confusingly similar to the earlier EVE trademark.

• Trademark Registration
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Distinctiveness
• Pharmaceutical Trademarks
• Trademark-opposition
• Likelihood-of-confusion

Krystalline Salt Limited v S.D.T Group of Companies (Trademark Application 40232 of 2009)

Krystalline Salt Limited v S.D.T Group of Companies (Trademark Application 40232 of 2009) [2024] UGRSB 11 (18 April 2024)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Application 40232 of 2009

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

The opposition to registration of the SAFFI trademark in Uganda was dismissed because the opponent lacked locus standi and did not meet section 44 requirements.

• Trademark Registration
• Territoriality Principle
• Bad Faith In Trademark
• Well Known Marks
• Opposition Procedure
• Trademark-opposition

East African Roofing Systems Limited v Metal Wood Industries Limited (Trademark Application 72822 of 2021)

East African Roofing Systems Limited v Metal Wood Industries Limited (Trademark Application 72822 of 2021) [2024] UGRSB 2 (7 February 2024)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Application 72822 of 2021

Judge

Birungi Denis - Senior Registration Officer

The Registrar dismissed an opposition to the CROCODILE trademark applications, holding that the marks were not similar and that trade dress or passing off issues were outside the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

• Trademark Registration
• Opposition Proceedings
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Distinctiveness
• Bad Faith
• Registrar Jurisdiction

Global Center Limited v Price Costco International Inc.

Global Center Limited v Price Costco International Inc. (Miscellaneous Application 766 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 81 (30 January 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 766 of 2023

Judge

Mutesi, J

The High Court held that pending trademark opposition did not bar a passing off suit, and dismissed the application to strike out the plaint.

• Trademark Registration
• Passing Off
• Jurisdictional Overlap
• Competence Of Affidavit
• Advocate Instructions
• Trademark-law

Uganda Young Men's Christian Association v The World Alliance of Young Men's Christian Associations (Trademark Application 67455 of 2020)

Uganda Young Men's Christian Association v The World Alliance of Young Men's Christian Associations (Trademark Application 67455 of 2020) [2023] UGRSB 3 (1 December 2023)

Court

Uganda Registration Services Bureau

Case number

Trademark Application 67455 of 2020

Judge

Rukundo Sarah - Senior Registration Officer

The Applicant filed for the disputed mark before the Opponent registered its mark in Uganda, and at the time of filing, no confusingly similar mark existed on the register. Trademark rights are territorial, and the Opponent's registration in Switzerland does not automatically confer rights in Uganda. Section 44 of the Trademarks Act protects marks registered in the country of origin only if the Opponent meets all statutory criteria, including that the Applicant has not used the mark continuously prior to the Opponent's registration in the country of origin. The Applicant demonstrated continuo…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Registration
• Territoriality Of Rights
• Well Known Marks
• Country Of Origin Protection
• Distinctiveness
• Continuous Use Exception