About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

United Republic of Tanzania



Agro Processing and Allied Products Ltd v Said Salim Bahkresa and Co Ltd, Commercial Case No. 31 of 2004, High Court of Tanzania, Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam

Agro Processing and Allied Products Ltd v Said Salim Bahkresa and Co Ltd, Commercial Case No. 31 of 2004, High Court of Tanzania, Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam

Luanda, J.

Date of Ruling: December 15, 2008


Both plaintiff and defendant are limited liability companies incorporate in Tanzania in the business of maize and wheat flour milling and distribution. The plaintiff applied for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendant from using the word "POA" in labelling, advertising, selling, distributing, circulating, or otherwise in relation to food flour milled, packed, sold, distributed, or circulated by the respondent. The Registrar refused to register the defendant’s trade marks ”SEMBE POA”, “UNGA POA”, and “NGANO POA.” The defendant continued to use their unregistered marks in the sale and distribution of maize and flour. The plaintiff thusly filed suit requesting a perpetual injunction, an order for withdrawal and destruction of the defendant’s products and advertisements, general and punitive damages, and litigation costs. The plaintiff contended that section 31 of the Trade and Service Mark Act 1986 gives a registered proprietor the exclusive right to use the trade mark in relation to the goods because the plaintiff held the certificate of registration. The defendant counter claimed for a declaratory relief, an order compelling the Registrar to withdraw the plaintiff’s monopoly over word “POA,” injunctive relief, general damages, and litigation costs.


(i) If the Registrar refuses to register an applicant’s mark, the correct course of action is to apply for an objection to the Registrar within one month from the rejection.

(ii) If the essential feature of a mark has been adopted, additional words or devices do not enable defendants to escape liability for trade mark infringement. (In Saville Perfumery Co. Ltd v June Perfect Ltd and another (1991) 58 R.P.C. 147, H.C.


The defendant is guilty and liable for the tort of passing off. The plaintiff is owed special damages, general and punitive damages.