About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection 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 AI Tools & Services The Organization Working at WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets Future of IP WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Youth Examiners Innovation Ecosystems Economics Finance Intangible Assets Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism Music Fashion 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 World Intangible Investment Highlights 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 Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions Build Back Fund 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 Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Staff Positions Affiliated Personnel Positions Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Jordan

JO013-j

Back

2025 WIPO IP Judges Forum Informal Case Summary - Supreme Court of Jordan [2020]: Case No. 2019/5827

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2025 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 7: Calculation of Damages in Civil Proceedings

 

Supreme Court of Jordan [2020]: Case No. 2019/5827

 

Date of judgment: March 17, 2020

Issuing authority: Supreme Court

Level of the issuing authority: Final Instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Civil)

Subject matter: Competition

Plaintiff: R.C. Company and Al-S. Pharmaceutical Warehouse

Defendant: J. Pharmaceutical Warehouse

Keywords: Unfair competition, compensation, moral damages, legal entities

 

Basic facts: The first plaintiff, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, produces, among other products, the extract C/Ozapine. It submitted a bid in a Ministry of Health tender for neurological and psychiatric medications, including this product. The defendant also submitted a bid for the same tender with a product of identical formulation but under a different name, manufactured by another company. At the same time, the defendant sent a letter to the Director-General of the Jordan Food and Drug Administration, alleging that the plaintiffs’ product was not registered and that the registration certificate submitted with their bid was invalid. This caused delays in the plaintiff’s ability to secure the tender until the Jordanian authorities verified the registration status, and until the second plaintiff traveled to Cyprus.


The defendant’s actions were deemed by the lower courts to constitute unfair competition, contrary to fair practices in industrial and commercial affairs, as they undermined trust in the first plaintiff’s products and commercial activities.

 

Held: The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s ruling, ordering the defendant to pay 22,000 Jordanian Dinars as compensation for moral damages, along with proportional fees and all expenses. No attorney’s fees were awarded, as both parties lost part of their claims. Statutory interest was also denied, since it had not been requested in the statement of claim.

 

Relevant holdings in relation to Calculation of Damages in Civil Proceedings: Article 267(1) of the Jordanian Civil Code provides that compensation extends to moral damages. Any infringement on another’s freedom, honor, reputation, social standing, or financial standing gives rise to liability. This provision is general and absolute, applying equally to natural persons and legal entities. Jurisprudence recognizes that moral damages suffered by a legal entity may arise in two ways:

  1. Directly from its activity: Hindering the entity’s institutional activity produces immaterial (moral) damages that affect its present and future operations, which are in substance financial damages.
  2. Consequentially: Infringements on an entity’s reputation or financial standing do not affect its psychological or emotional state, but rather constitute financial damages.

 

Accordingly, both natural and legal persons may claim compensation for such harm. Since the Court of Appeal followed this reasoning, its decision was lawful, and the grounds for appeal were dismissed.

 

Relevant legislation: The Unfair Competition and Trade Secrets Law & Law No. 15 of 2000; The Civil Code No. 43 of 1976; and Civil Procedure Law No. 24 of 1988.