Paul Ampurire and Vigaras UG Limited v Kazibwe Ronald (Trademark Application No. UG T 2022 075575)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The tribunal dismissed the opposition as premature because it was filed before the trademark application was published in the gazette, as required by section 12(1) of the Trademarks Act and regulation 28 of the Trademark Regulations 2023. The tribunal further held that the opponents lacked a cause of action because the first opponent suggested the mark while employed by Comedy Store Uganda Ltd, and any rights would vest in the employer, not the employee. The tribunal issued a non-completion notice directing the applicant to complete registration within 14 days or face abandonment of the application.
Outcome
Opposition dismissed; applicant directed to complete registration within 14 days or application will be deemed abandoned
Facts
The applicant filed trademark application No. UG/T/2022/075575 on 26 May 2022 seeking to register the mark STRESS CLINIC for services in class 41. The opponents filed an opposition on 14 December 2023 after their own application for the same mark was rejected. The first opponent claimed he originated the phrase STRESS CLINIC in 2021 during management meetings for Comedy Store Uganda Ltd, where he was employed as manager. The opponents alleged the applicant filed the application in bad faith. The applicant claimed he originated the phrase and that the opponents were plagiarizing it. The tribunal noted that the opposed application had not been published in the gazette, and the opponents only learned of it through an examination report rejecting their own application. The first opponent admitted that STRESS CLINIC was a Comedy Store Ltd project and that he suggested the name during a work meeting.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant filed for the registration of the opposed mark in bad faith.
- Whether an opposition can be filed when a trademark application has not been published in the gazette.
- Whether the opponents had a cause of action to oppose the trademark registration.
Orders
- The opposition is dismissed.
- A non-completion notice is hereby issued against the Applicant directing him to take relevant steps towards registration of trademark application number 075575 within 14 days from the date of this ruling, failure of which, the Registrar shall deem the application abandoned.
- Each party shall bear its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Trademarks Act Cap 225 s.12
- Trademarks Act Cap 225 s.16(3)
- Trademarks Act Cap 225 s.7
- Trademark Regulations 2023 reg.28
- Trademark Regulations 2023 reg.79
- Trademark Regulations 2023 reg.40
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act Cap 222 s.7
- Industrial Property Act Cap 72 s.19
- East African Customs Management Act s.229
Cases cited (6)
- Makula International v His Eminence Cardinal Nsubuga and Another (1982 HCB)
- Liberty Group ltd v Liberty ICD ltd, application for cancellation of trademark no. 47160
- Kawuki Mathius v Commissioner General Uganda Revenue Authority (Misc. Cause No. 14 of 2014)
- R v Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police, ex parte Calveley and others [1986] 1 All ER 257
- Ashmore v Corp of Lloyd's [1992] 2 All ER 486 House of Lords
- Michael Penhallurick v MD5 Limited [2021] EWHC 292
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.