Wakilii

Pentecostal Assemblies of God Limited V Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Limited & Another (CIVIL SUIT NO. 97 & 290 OF 2015)

High Court · [2019] UGHCCD 217 · 2019 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trademark infringement, unlawful use of company name, and property ownership
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff. 1st Defendant's registration ordered cancelled, permanent injunction issued against use of infringing name, properties ordered returned to Plaintiff, aggravated damages and costs awarded.

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 court held that the registration of the 1st Defendant (Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Limited) by the 2nd Defendant (Registrar of Companies) was unlawful and erroneous because the name was confusingly similar to the Plaintiff's earlier-registered company name and trademark. The Plaintiff, incorporated in 1999 and holder of a validly registered trademark, was entitled to exclusive use of the name. The 1st Defendant's subsequent 2014 registration violated the principle that first-in-time registration takes precedence, and the confusingly similar name was likely to mislead the public and cause confusion. The court ordered cancellation of the 1st Defendant's registration, issued a permanent injunction restraining use of the infringing name, declared the Plaintiff the rightful owner of disputed properties in Lira, and awarded aggravated damages of UGX 12,500,000 for the 1st Defendant's high-handed and fraudulent conduct.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff. 1st Defendant's registration ordered cancelled, permanent injunction issued against use of infringing name, properties ordered returned to Plaintiff, aggravated damages and costs awarded.

Facts

The Plaintiff was incorporated in January 1999 as Pentecostal Assemblies of God Limited and subsequently registered a trademark in the same name in 2014. In February 2014, the 1st Defendant was incorporated as Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Limited. One of the 1st Defendant's directors was Mr Mukalu Joel, a former employee of the Plaintiff who had been excommunicated in 2013 for questionable character. The 1st Defendant used the confusingly similar name to take over the Plaintiff's places of worship and properties in Lira District, causing confusion among Christians. The Registrar of Companies (2nd Defendant) wrote to the 1st Defendant in October 2014 and February 2015 directing a name change, but the 1st Defendant refused. The Plaintiff brought suit for trademark infringement, unlawful use of its company name, and recovery of properties. The 1st Defendant counterclaimed seeking revocation of the Plaintiff's trademark on grounds of fraud and declarations that its own registration was lawful. At trial, the 1st Defendant's counsel and witnesses failed to appear on the hearing date despite being present in court, and the matter proceeded ex parte against the 1st Defendant.

Issues

  1. Whether the registration of the 1st Defendant with a name similar to that of the Plaintiff was lawful?
  2. Whether the registration of the Plaintiff's trademark 'Pentecostal Assemblies of God' by the 2nd Defendant was lawful?
  3. Who is the lawful owner of the land and properties claimed by the Parties in Lira?
  4. What are the remedies available to the Parties?

Orders

  • The 1st Defendant was unlawfully and erroneously registered by the 2nd Defendant.
  • The registration of the 1st Defendant shall be cancelled by the Registrar of Companies forthwith.
  • The registration of the 1st Defendant with a name closely resembling the trademark of the Plaintiff is unlawful.
  • Permanent injunction issued restraining the 1st Defendant from using or trading under the name 'Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Limited'.
  • All properties registered in the names of the plaintiff and illegally held by the 1st defendant shall be returned to the plaintiff.
  • Aggravated damages of UGX 12,500,000 awarded against the 1st Defendant.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff: 1st Defendant to pay two-thirds, 2nd Defendant to pay one-third.

Rules and key headnotes

Company Law — Company Names — Similarity — Confusingly Similar Names — First-in-Time Priority
Where two companies are registered with names so similar as to cause confusion to the public, the registration first in time takes precedence, and the subsequent registration is unlawful where the officer of the registry failed to conduct a proper search before effecting the later registration.
Company Law — Company Registration — Registrar's Powers — Direction to Change Name under Companies Act s.37
Under section 37 of the Companies Act, where in the registrar's opinion the name by which a company is registered gives a misleading indication of the nature of its activities as to be likely to cause harm to the public, the registrar may direct it to change its name, and refusal to comply with such a directive renders the registration unlawful.
Intellectual Property — Trademarks — Capability of Distinguishing — Broad Interpretation
A sign is capable of distinguishing for trademark purposes if it is not incapable of doing so. The requirement is satisfied by the negative standard that the sign is not incapable of distinguishing, as opposed to a positive requirement that it can distinguish. Signs are only incapable of distinguishing if they do not possess inherent characteristics to distinguish or sufficient capricious additions to enable them to factually distinguish.
Intellectual Property — Trademarks — Opposition Procedure — Estoppel — Failure to Lodge Opposition within Statutory Period
Where an applicant for registration of a trademark complies with the procedure requiring advertisement in the Uganda Gazette for sixty days, and a person objecting to the registration fails to lodge a notice of objection with the registrar within that period, that person is estopped from subsequently praying that the trademark be revoked.
Tort Law — Damages — Aggravated Damages — High-Handed and Fraudulent Conduct
Aggravated damages are appropriately awarded where a defendant deliberately incorporates a company with a name confusingly similar to that of the plaintiff, knowing that such similarity would cause confusion to the public and facilitate takeover of the plaintiff's properties, and where the defendant refuses to comply with the registrar's directive to change the name, as such conduct is high-handed and fraudulent and merits punishment.

Legislation cited (5)

  • Companies Act s.37
  • Trademarks Act No. 17 of 2010 s.11(1)
  • Trademarks Act No. 17 of 2010 s.12(1)
  • Trademark Regulations 2012 reg.25(1)
  • Trademark Regulations 2012 reg.28

Cases cited (6)

  • Standard Signs (U) Limited v Fred Leo Ogwang t/a Shandard & Shandard Signs Ltd (HCCS No. 240 of 2006)
  • Auto Rescue Limited v Auto Rescue Limited [2008] 2 EA 39
  • AD2000 Trademark [1997] RPC 168
  • Wing Joo Loong Ginseng Hong (Singapore) Co Pte Ltd v Qinghai Xinyuan Foreign Trade Co Ltd [2009] 2 SLR (R) 814
  • Dr Denis Lwamafa v Attorney General (HCCS No. 79 of 1983) [1992] 1 KALR 21
  • Ouma v Nairobi City Council [1976] KLR 298

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Pentecostal Assemblies of God Limited V Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Limited & Another (CIVIL SUIT NO. 97 & 290 OF 2015) [2019] UGHCCD 217 (1 November 2019)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.