Under Section 26 of the Trademarks Act, 2009, trademark infringement occurs when a person uses, without the registered owner's permission, a mark that is identical or deceptively similar to a registered trademark — in relation to identical or similar goods or services — in a way that is likely to cause confusion. Infringement also includes: using the mark on business documents, labels, or advertising; importing or exporting goods bearing the mark; and using a mark similar to a well-known mark on different goods if it implies a connection with the owner or damages their reputation.

Bangladesh law provides three parallel enforcement tracks: (1) Civil Remedies — file a suit in the District Court for injunction, damages, account of profits, and destruction of goods (Sections 96–97, 102); (2) Criminal Remedies — file a complaint before a Metropolitan Magistrate or First Class Magistrate for imprisonment and fines against the infringer (Sections 73, 74, 83); and (3) Administrative & Practical Actions — cease and desist notices, customs border action under Section 109, DPDT administrative complaints, and market monitoring. The most effective strategy typically combines all three tracks simultaneously.

Under Section 96 of the Trademarks Act, 2009, all civil suits for trademark infringement and passing off must be filed in the District Court. Under Section 2(4), "District Court" includes the District Judge Court, Additional District Judge Court, and Joint District Judge Court. No court inferior to the District Court has jurisdiction to hear these cases. The appropriate District Court is determined by where the infringement took place or where the defendant carries on business.

Bangladeshi courts can grant a temporary (interim) injunction relatively quickly — often within a few weeks of filing if the case is urgent. In extreme cases, an ad-interim (ex parte) injunction can be granted within days, even before the defendant is notified, if the plaintiff demonstrates imminent irreparable harm. The court considers three factors: prima facie case, irreparable loss, and balance of convenience. Under Section 102(5), the court may even grant an injunction while related proceedings are stayed. Once granted, violating an injunction carries serious legal consequences, including potential criminal liability.

Under Section 97(1), you may choose one of two financial remedies: Damages compensate you for the actual financial loss you have suffered — lost sales, harm to reputation, costs. Account of profits requires the infringer to hand over all profits they made from the unauthorized use of your mark — regardless of your actual loss. You choose whichever is higher. Typically, account of profits is chosen when the infringer made large profits from the mark, while damages suits the scenario where your provable losses are significant. You cannot claim both simultaneously under the same suit.

Yes — but your options are more limited. Under Section 24(1), you cannot bring an infringement suit for an unregistered mark. However, Section 24(2) expressly preserves the right to bring a passing off action. To succeed, you must prove the "Classical Trinity": (1) your mark has established goodwill among consumers, (2) the defendant is misrepresenting their goods as yours causing confusion, and (3) you have suffered or are likely to suffer damage. The same civil remedies (injunction, damages, account of profits, destruction) are available under Section 97. The burden of proof is much heavier than for registered marks.

Trademark infringement is a statutory action available only to the owner of a registered trademark (Section 24(1)). It is relatively straightforward — you show the mark is registered, the defendant used an identical or similar mark without permission. Passing off is a common law action available regardless of registration (Section 24(2)). It protects your goodwill and business reputation — but requires you to prove three things: established goodwill, the defendant's misrepresentation causing confusion, and resulting damage. The same court (District Court, Section 96(d)) hears both types of action, and the same remedies are available under Section 97.

Under Section 73 (falsifying a trademark) and Section 74 (selling goods with a false trademark), the penalty is: imprisonment of 6 months to 2 years and/or a fine of BDT 50,000 to 2,00,000 for a first offence. For a repeat offence, the punishment increases to imprisonment of 1 to 3 years and/or a fine of BDT 1,00,000 to 3,00,000. In addition, under Section 79, the court may order the forfeiture and destruction of all infringing goods, labels, and machinery used in the offence. Criminal cases are tried before a Metropolitan Magistrate or First Class Magistrate (Section 83(2)).

For criminal prosecution, Section 86 sets a strict limitation: you must file within 3 years from the date of the offence, or within 2 years from the date you first knew of the offence — whichever comes first. Once this period passes, criminal prosecution is no longer possible. For civil infringement suits, while a similar 3-year limitation applies, trademark infringement is often a continuing wrong — each fresh act of infringement creates a new cause of action. Even if past infringement is time-barred, you may still sue for present and ongoing infringement and seek an injunction to stop it.

Yes. Under Section 97(1), in civil infringement and passing off suits, the court may order the delivery up and destruction (or erasure) of all infringing labels, marks, packaging, and goods. Where it is possible to remove the infringing mark from the goods without destroying the product itself, the court may order removal instead. In criminal cases, under Section 79, the court may order the forfeiture of all infringing goods to the government and their destruction. An acquitted defendant's goods can still be forfeited if they bear a false trademark — the acquittal does not protect the goods themselves.

To file a trademark infringement civil suit, you will need: (1) Registration certificate or copy of the trademark register entry (Section 28 — prima facie evidence of validity); (2) Clear representation of the trademark (mandatory attachment to the plaint); (3) Evidence of infringement — photographs of infringing goods, sample products, invoices, test purchase receipts; (4) Affidavit (in Form TM-18 if required) supporting the interim injunction application; (5) Authorization/Power of Attorney if filed through a lawyer or agent (Form TM-10); and (6) Court fees. The plaint must clearly state the registration details, the nature of the infringement, the court's jurisdiction, and the specific remedies sought.

A well-known trademark is one that is widely recognized by the relevant public as associated with a particular origin of goods or services. Under Section 10(6), the court determines well-known status based on: the knowledge/recognition of the mark among relevant consumers, and the results of promotional activities in Bangladesh. Under Sections 10(5) and 26(7), a well-known mark receives cross-category protection — even if someone uses it for completely different goods, it is still an infringement if it implies a connection with the mark's owner or damages the mark's reputation. Foreign brands that are internationally well-known may also claim this protection in Bangladesh, even without local registration, through the Paris Convention and WTO-TRIPS framework.

Yes — through a passing off action. Under Section 24(2), any brand — including unregistered foreign brands — may bring a passing off action if they can prove established goodwill, misrepresentation by the defendant, and resulting damage. Bangladesh is a member of the Paris Convention and WTO-TRIPS, and under Section 121, reciprocal protection is available to nationals of countries that extend similar protection to Bangladeshi brands. Foreign brands with established market presence in Bangladesh can prove goodwill through shipping documents, import records, advertising materials, and consumer recognition. If the foreign mark is well-known under Section 10(6), it may also claim statutory protection even without registration.

An Anton Piller Order is a court-authorized search and seizure order that allows the trademark owner (and their representatives) to enter the infringer's premises, search for, inspect, and seize infringing goods and evidence — before the defendant has any opportunity to destroy or hide them. It is particularly useful when there is a strong risk that counterfeit goods or evidence will be removed or destroyed if advance notice is given. In Bangladesh, this form of relief falls under the court's inherent powers and the Code of Civil Procedure (Order 39), read with Section 102(5) of the Trademarks Act 2009 which empowers the court to grant interim relief including property attachment. Given Bangladesh's evolving IP enforcement landscape, securing ex parte interim injunctions alongside market raids coordinated with criminal complaints is the practical equivalent.

Yes. Under Section 109 of the Trademarks Act, 2009, and the Customs Act, the Commissioner of Customs has the power to detain and confiscate goods bearing a registered trademark being imported or exported in violation of the trademark owner's rights. You can apply to the Commissioner of Customs to have your mark placed on a watch list so that suspected counterfeit goods are flagged at the border. You can also approach the High Court Division for an order directing Customs to detain infringing goods. This is a powerful tool for stopping the import of counterfeit goods before they enter the Bangladeshi market.

Violating a court-ordered injunction has serious consequences. Under Section 91(4), orders under the Trademarks Act have the force of a civil court decree. A breach of injunction can result in: (1) Property attachment under Section 102(5); (2) Civil imprisonment under the Code of Civil Procedure (Order 39, Rule 2A); (3) Criminal liability under Section 73 if the violation involves continued use of the mark (6 months–2 years imprisonment, BDT 50,000–2,00,000 fine); and (4) the court may appoint a Receiver over the defendant's business. Documenting injunction violations and reporting them to the court promptly is essential.

Claiming ignorance may shield a defendant from financial liability but not from injunctions or forfeiture. Under Section 97(2), if the defendant proves that at the time of infringement they did not know and had no reasonable grounds to believe the mark was registered, and that they stopped using the mark upon learning of the registration, the court will not award damages or account of profits. However, the court can still grant an injunction and order destruction of infringing goods. For criminal cases under Section 74, a good faith defence (no fraudulent intent, reasonable precautions taken, disclosure of supply chain) may result in acquittal — but goods can still be forfeited under Section 79.

No — a cease and desist letter is not a legal prerequisite to filing a lawsuit under the Trademarks Act, 2009. You can proceed directly to court. However, sending a well-drafted cease and desist letter first is strongly recommended as best practice because: (1) many infringers stop upon receiving a formal legal notice, avoiding costly litigation; (2) it establishes the infringer's knowledge of your rights — critical for proving wilfulness in damages and criminal cases; (3) it creates a documentary record of the dispute; and (4) it gives you the moral high ground if the matter proceeds to court. Where urgency demands immediate court action (e.g., ongoing market flooding), file for injunction simultaneously with or before the C&D letter.

To prove goodwill in a passing off action, you should file the following evidence by affidavit (Form TM-18 where applicable): (1) Sales invoices — showing the volume and duration of sales in Bangladesh (Section 71(1)(e)); (2) Advertising copies — newspaper ads, brochures, digital campaigns showing promotional investment; (3) Product labels and packaging showing actual use of the mark in commerce; (4) Shipping documents and bills of entry — especially important for foreign brands (Section 84); (5) Consumer affidavits or testimonials from dealers/traders confirming recognition of the mark; and (6) Market survey data if available. The court under Section 10(6) assesses goodwill based on consumer/trader knowledge and the results of promotional activities in Bangladesh.

Under Section 2(20), a "deceptively similar" mark is one that so nearly resembles another mark as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion among the general public. Courts assess this by asking: would an average consumer, seeing the defendant's mark, be likely to confuse it with the plaintiff's mark or assume a business connection? Factors considered include: the visual, phonetic, and conceptual similarity of the marks; the nature and similarity of the goods/services; the strength and distinctiveness of the plaintiff's mark; actual instances of confusion; trade channels; and the overall impression created by the marks. For well-known marks (Section 26(7)), the analysis extends to different product categories.

Yes. If the defendant holds a trademark registration that conflicts with yours, you can challenge it through: (1) Rectification/Cancellation at the DPDT — under Sections 51 and 42, you can apply to the Registrar or the High Court to have the conflicting mark removed from the register on grounds of non-use, bad faith, lack of distinctiveness, or prior rights. Non-use for 5 consecutive years is a ground for cancellation. (2) Opposition proceedings — if the conflicting mark has been published in the Trademark Journal but not yet registered, you can file an opposition within 2 months of publication (Section 18(1)). (3) High Court application — directly under Section 51 for rectification where the Registrar's jurisdiction is inadequate. Revocation/cancellation and infringement proceedings are generally conducted separately under the Act.

Under Section 31 of the Trademarks Act 2009, a person may use their own personal name, the name of their business premises, or descriptive terms about their goods in good faith — and the registered trademark owner cannot prevent this. However, this defence is narrow: the use must be bona fide, not designed to trade on the plaintiff's reputation, and not likely to cause confusion. Using your own name in a stylised or similar way to a well-known registered mark will not attract this protection. Courts scrutinise whether the claimed "own name" use is genuinely descriptive or is in fact an attempt to free-ride on an established brand's goodwill.

Yes. Trademark infringement cases follow the standard appellate hierarchy. A decision by the District Court can be appealed to the High Court Division of the Supreme Court. A decision of the High Court Division (including appeals from the Registrar's decisions under Section 100(2)) can be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. In criminal cases, either party may appeal the Magistrate Court's judgment to the Sessions Court and then to the High Court Division. For forfeiture orders under Section 79(3) where goods valued above BDT 5,000 are forfeited even upon acquittal, an appeal must be filed within 30 days of the forfeiture order.

A trademark infringement plaint must include: (1) Full identity of parties — plaintiff and defendant names, addresses, nationalities, and legal status; (2) Trademark details — registration number, registration date, class(es), and the goods/services covered; (3) Clear representation of the mark — a printed or digitally reproduced image of the mark (mandatory); (4) Description of infringement — how the defendant is using an identical or similar mark, the nature of their goods, and evidence of consumer confusion; (5) Cause of action with dates — when infringement commenced and was first discovered; (6) Jurisdiction basis — why the chosen District Court has jurisdiction; (7) Specific relief sought — injunction, damages, account of profits, delivery up/destruction; and (8) Verification and supporting affidavit (Section 231). For passing off, additionally include evidence of goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage.

Yes. Under Section 96, both infringement suits (for registered marks) and passing off actions (for unregistered marks) are heard in the same District Court. Where the plaintiff has a registered mark and also claims common law passing off rights for unregistered elements of their brand (e.g., trade dress, get-up), both claims can be combined in a single suit. Similarly, revocation/cancellation and infringement actions may be heard together if the issues are closely related and arise from the same facts. Combining claims in a single suit is more efficient and may be strategically advantageous — it avoids multiple proceedings and allows all related evidence to be considered holistically.

The Department of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (DPDT) plays a primarily administrative role in trademark enforcement: (1) Raids and seizures — the Registrar can conduct administrative raids and confiscate infringing goods based on complaints or suo motu; (2) Opposition proceedings — adjudicating opposition cases where third parties challenge pending trademark applications; (3) Rectification/cancellation — the Registrar can hear applications to remove marks from the register on specific grounds; (4) Criminal complaints — for certain offences (Sections 76, 77, 78), only the Registrar's written complaint can initiate criminal proceedings; and (5) ADR and mediation — the DPDT assists in resolving disputes through negotiation and alternative mechanisms. The DPDT is not a court and cannot award damages — for financial remedies you must go to the District Court.

No — trademark rights are territorial. Registration in another country (e.g., USA, UK, EU) does not automatically give you legal protection in Bangladesh. You must register separately at the DPDT. However, Bangladesh is a member of the Paris Convention, so if you register in a Paris Convention country and then file in Bangladesh within 6 months, you can claim that earlier filing date as your priority date in Bangladesh (Section 120). If your mark is internationally well-known (Section 10(6)), you may claim cross-border protection even without Bangladesh registration — but this is harder to enforce and litigate. The safest approach is always to file a separate trademark application in Bangladesh at the DPDT.

Generally, statutory infringement protection (and the related financial remedies) only applies from the date of registration. You cannot claim damages under the infringement provisions for acts that occurred before your trademark was registered. However, if you had established goodwill before registration, you may be able to claim damages for the pre-registration period through a passing off action (Section 24(2)), provided you can prove all three elements of the Classical Trinity for that period. After registration, any infringement — including acts that began before registration and continue afterward — gives rise to both infringement and passing off claims from the date of registration forward.

"Honest concurrent use" under Section 10(2) refers to a situation where two parties have independently been using identical or similar marks in good faith for an extended period. The Registrar may permit both marks to coexist on the register — usually with conditions or limitations — if satisfied that the concurrent use has been honest and without intent to deceive. However, this is a defence to registration, not a general defence to infringement in court. In an infringement action, if the defendant can show they have been honestly using a similar mark for a significant period before the plaintiff's registration, this may affect the court's discretion in granting or withholding certain remedies (particularly damages), though an injunction may still be granted.

SUPREMEiP is a specialist IP law firm headquartered in Dhaka, Bangladesh, with extensive hands-on experience in trademark enforcement — from cease and desist drafting through to District Court litigation, criminal prosecution, and DPDT administrative action. Our approach: (1) rapid assessment of the infringement situation and the best enforcement track; (2) evidence collection strategy — market monitoring, test purchases, documentation; (3) drafting legally robust cease and desist notices; (4) urgent interim injunction applications where needed; (5) full civil suit preparation and court representation; (6) coordination of criminal complaints and raids for counterfeiting cases; and (7) customs border action for import/export infringement. We have successfully enforced trademark rights for both local and international clients across Bangladesh. Contact us at info@supremeip.com or +8801613336333.

Yes. Under Section 26(4)(c), using a trademark on goods intended for import or export is expressly included as a use of the trademark in Bangladesh. Under Section 50(1), using a trademark on goods manufactured for export is treated as use in Bangladesh — the same as domestic sale. Therefore, manufacturing goods bearing another party's registered trademark in Bangladesh, even if solely for export, constitutes trademark infringement and is subject to all the same remedies: civil action, criminal prosecution under Section 73, and forfeiture of goods under Section 79. There is a limited exception under Section 76(2)(c) for the word "registered" where goods are exported to a country where the mark is registered — but this does not apply to the use of the mark itself.

Yes. Under Section 110 of the Trademarks Act, 2009, if the validity of a trademark registration is challenged in legal proceedings and the court rules in the owner's favour, the court or tribunal may issue a Certificate of Validity. This certificate confirms that the registration has been tested and upheld in court. In any future legal proceedings involving the same mark, a Certificate of Validity strengthens the owner's position significantly — it is harder for future defendants to challenge the mark's validity, and it may entitle the plaintiff to an award of legal costs on a higher scale if a defendant unsuccessfully challenges the registration in a subsequent case.