The Protection of Trademark Owners under Cameroonian Law: A Critical Analysis
Keywords:
Protection, Trademark, Owner, Law, Critical, Analysis, Rights, CameroonAbstract
This paper critically examines the protection of trademark owners under Cameroonian law, evaluating its effectiveness and the challenges faced in practice. Trademark protection plays a vital role in promoting innovation, building consumer trust, and preserving the integrity of the marketplace. This paper begins with an overview of the legal framework governing trademarks in Cameroon, including relevant statutes, international agreements as well as domestic legislations. It further explores the mechanisms available for enforcement of liabilities by the competent courts on trademark rights. The paper also highlights key challenges, such as inadequate enforcement, lack of public awareness, and the prevalence of counterfeit goods, which undermine the protection of trademark owners. By adopting doctrinal analysis, this paper aims to provide recommendations for enhancing the protection of trademark owners in Cameroon, promoting a more robust and friendly environment for businesses and safeguarding consumer interests.
References
Shagufta Parveen (2002), Intellectual Property Rights, Masters Dissertation University of Aligarh (India) p 26.
Catherine Colston (1999) op cit p 8.
Ibid.
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of March 20, 1883, lastly amended on September
, 1979.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2003) Dispute settlement World Trade Organization 3.5 GATT 1994 P 3.
Annex 1A of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, signed in Marrakesh,
Morocco on 15 April 1994.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2003) op cit p 4.
Rodrick Ndi (2017) op cit p 14.
GH.C Boden Haussen: "Guide to the application of the Paris Convention for the protection of Intellectual Property as revised at Stockholm in 1967", Sweden, Dretsingsholmsvägen, 1988 p.5.
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property p 1.
WIPO "Summaries of conventions, treaties and Agreements administered by WIPO p.24 Publication No. 442 ( 2011).
Article 19 of the Paris Treaty.
Article 1(2) of the Paris convention of 1883.
Rodrick Ndi (2017) op cit p 16.
Article 2 (1) of the Paris Convention is to the effect that; Nationals of any country of the Union shall, as regards the protection of industrial property, enjoy in all the other countries of the Union the advantages that their respective laws now grant, or may hereafter grant, to nationals; all without prejudice to the rights specially provided for by this Convention.
Consequently, they shall have the same protection as the latter, and the same legal remedy against any
infringement of their rights, provided that the conditions and formalities imposed upon nationals are
complied with.
Akama S.P., (2022) Intellectual Property Law, lecture notes Masters I, University of Maroua p. 4.
Article 3 of the Paris convention 1883.
Akama S.P (2022) op cit p 6.
Article 4 A(2) of the Paris Convention
See Article 9 (1) of the Paris Convention.
Article 6(1) of the Paris Convention, (2), (3) Op. Cit p 6.
Article 6 A (1).
Article 6 B (1).
Article 6 B (2).
Article 6 B (3).
Article 48 Annex III of the Bangui Agreement. “The owner of a mark or holder of an exclusive right of exploitation may, acting in pursuance of an order from the President of the civil court within the jurisdiction the action is to be taken...
Article 47(2) of the Bangui agreement "If the accused in an action brought before the criminal court raises questions in this defense concerning the ownership of the mark, the competent court shall pass judgment.
Frederick Mostert "Famous and well known trademarks", London, LexisNexis UK, 1997, p. 20.
Article 6 of the Paris Convention.
Prayank K and Swapna R.A . M (2020)wipo Madrid ,Madrid application-A one-stop solution for international registration of marks.
Charlene Musiza (2021) op cit p 41.
Nations Unies-Recueil des Traités (1972), Multilateral Agreement concerning International registration of marks, Volume 828-I-1852 P 391.
https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/registration/madrid/summary-madrid-marks.html accessed on the 21/03/2025.
Article 1 of the Madrid agreement.
Ibid.
Article 1(2) of the Madrid Agreement.
Ibid.
Article 3 of the Paris Convention is to the effect that Nationals of countries outside the Union who are domiciled or who have real and effective industrial or commercial establishments in the territory of one of the countries of the Union shall be treated in the same manner as nationals of the countries of the Union
Article 3 of the Madrid Agreement.
Article 3 (1),(2) of the Madrid Agreement.
WIPO Publication No. 418 (E), The Madrid Agreement Concerning the international Registration of Marks, p.4.
Ibid, P.6.
Ibid, P.8.
https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/registration/madrid/summary-madrid-marks.html accessed on the 21/03/2025.
Article 5(2) of the Madrid agreement.
Article 7(1) of the Madrid Agreement.
Article 7(2) of the Madrid Agreement
Intellectual Property India; Patents, Designs, Trademarks, Geographical Indications also available at http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/en/documents/pdf/madrid_marks.pdf.
Article 1 of the Madrid Protocol.
Article 14(a) of the Madrid Protocol.
Article 14(b) of the Madrid Protocol.
(1) If several Contracting States agree to effect the unification of their domestic legislation’s on marks, they may notify the Director General (i) that a common Office shall be substituted for the national Office of each of them, https:and (ii) that the whole of their respective territories shall be deemed to be a single State for the
purposes of the application of all or part of the provisions preceding this Article as well as the
provisions of Articles 9quinquies and 9sexies.(2) Such notification shall not take effect until three months after the date of the communication thereof. By the Director General to the other Contracting Parties.
Wipo (2022) Guide to the Madrid System, International Registration of marks under the Madrid Protocol, p 250.
https://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members accessed on the 22/03/2025.
https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/madrid-protocol visited on the 22/03/2025.
https://patentlawip.com/practice-areas/trademarks/madrid-protocol-trademarks.accessed on the 22/03/2025.
https://www.redpoints.com.blog/madrid-protocol accessed on the 22/03/2025.
Rodrick N (2017) op cit p18.
https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/convention/summary_wipo_convention.html accessed on the 22/03/2025.
Ibid.
Lalit J.B and Rajkishore N (2017) an Introduction to Intellectual Property Rights and their Importance in Indian Context, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights Vol 22, p 33.
Ibid.
WIPO (1992) Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification.of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks p 3.
Article 1 of the Nice Agreement.
Article 1(2) of the Nice Agreement.
Article 2(1) of the Nice Agreement.
Article 2(2) of the Nice Agreement.
Caroline J N (2015) Challenges of Transnational Trademark Law Practice: The Case of Nigerian Companies’ Brands in OAPI States, Revue générale de droit, Vol 45 p 332.
Charlene Musiza (2021) op cit p 44.
World Trade Organization, "Part 11- Standards concerning the availability, scope and use of Intellectual Property Rights; Sections 5 and 6, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. hitp://www.wto.org/english/docs_a/legal_e27-trips 04ce.htm accessed 24 of November 2025.
The preamble of the TRIPS Agreement (Summary of the objectives of the Agreement).
Justin Malbon, Charles Lawson "Interpreting and Implementing the TRIPS Agreement is it fair?, London, Edward Elgar 2008, P 15.
http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/docs_e.htm.
John S. Mckeown (2010) op cit p 3.
Kutiefe U.K (2021), op cit p 22.
James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins (2014), Intellectual Property: Law and the Information Society p 409.
Article 4 of the Trips agreement.
Article 16 of the Trips agreement.
Article 18 of the Trips agreement.
“Any good including packaging bearing without authorization, a trademark which is identical to a validly registered trademark in respect of such goods, or which cannot be distinguished in its essential aspects from such a trademark, and which thereby infringes the rights of the owner of the trademark in question under the law of the country of importation”.
See Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Akama S.P (2022) Intellectual Property Law op cit p 26.
Ines Tavares (2022) Bangui Agreement: A summary of the essential changes.
Lucien Menjenyia N. (2022) The Principle of Territoriality as a Contributory Infringement Doctrine to Copy Right under Cameroonian Copyright Law, Masters Dissertation, University of Dschang p 21.
Ibid.
Patents annex L. Utility Models Annex 11, Trade Marks and service Marks Annex III, Industrial Design Annex IV. Trade Names Annex V. Geographical Indications Annex VI, Literary and Artistic Property Annex VIL, Protection against Unfair Competition Annex VIII, Layouts-designs (topographies) of intergraded circuits annex IX and Plant Variety Annex X.
Article 2(c) and (d) of the 2015 revised Bangui agreement.
Article 42 of the 2015 revised Bangui agreement.
See Article 2 (1) of Annex III of the Bangui agreement.
Unlawful exploitation includes amongst other things, fixation of fraudulent marks, willfully selling or offering for sale one or more goods bearing a fraudulent mark, making a fraudulent imitation of a mark and offering for sale one or more goods bearing fraudulently imitated mark or information liable to mislead the buyer as to the nature of all goods or those who provide or offer to provide goods or services under such a mark.
See Article 41 of The Bangui Agreement.
Catherine Colston (1999), op cit p 343.
Djoukuou N.F (2021), the protection accorded to trademark owners upon registration under Annex III of the Revised Bangui Agreement. Masters Dissertation University of Dschang.
Https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basic examples consulted on the 15/01/2025.
Article 2(2) and (3) of Annex III of the Bangui Agreement.
https://www.ohada.org/en/history -of-Ohada accessed on the 20/05/2023.
Guinea Bissau, Senegal, Central African Republic, Mali, Comoros, Burkina Faso, Benin, Niger, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Togo, Chad, Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and Democratic Republic of Congo(RDC) are all parties to the Ohada Treaty.
Jonathan Bashi R (2018)”OHADA and the making of Transnational Commercial Law in Africa». Law and Development Review,vol 11(2),Pp 371-395.
Ngaundje Leno D. (2020), The OHADA Structure as a Possible Model for the Development of a Commercial Law Structure in the Southern African Development Community (SADC), International Journal of Social Sciences and Management Review Vol. 3, Issues 06, p 6.
Ibid.
Alhousseini Mouloul (2009), Understanding the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (O.H.A.D.A) Vol. 60 p 21.
Ibid.
https://www.ohadalegis.com/anglais/intell-property.html accessed on the 20/05/2025.
Henri-Desire Behey Modi Koko op Cit, р 30.
The Central African Monetary and Economic Union (UDEAC)
The Central African Monetary Union (UMAC): UMAC includes two specialized institutions: the BEAC (Bank of Central African States) and the COBAC (Central African Banking Commission.
Wankah, (2012), Op Cit, P.33.
Article 51 (1) All foreign products, natural or manufactured, bearing either on themselves or on their packaging, crates, balers, envelopes or labels, etc., a trademark or trade name, sign or indication of any nature to lead anyone to believe that they were manufactured in a State with which an agreement on the subject has been signed, or which are original.
Establishes counterfeiting as a third class customs offence "Are liable to confiscation of the object of the fraud, confiscation of the means of transport, confiscation of the objects used to conceal the fraud, a fine equal to four times the value of the objects confiscated and imprisonment of six months to three years 3. Counterfeiting (§ 1, 2 and 4 for the record).
Decision No. 2413/CD/COR of 10/08/2006 of the Douala Bonanjo Court of First Instance.
Douane Camerounaise, douanescustoms-cm.net/en/news/11-breves/450-des-medicaments-saisis-dans-la-region- du-centre.html (assessed on the 10th June2024).
The 1998 law on competition makes provision for rules to improve a fair competition in the country.
See law no.65/LF/24 of 12 November 1965, on the institution of the Penal Code which went effectively operational in 1967 and amended by Law no 2016/007 of 12 July 2016.
See E.N. Ngwafor, Corporate Criminal Responsibility, Star Printers and Publishers Ltd. U.K., 1989, p1. See also J.Coplan, R. Weisberg, G. Binder, Criminal Law Cases and Materials, Butterworth, 7th ed. 2012, p 149, quoting
Smith and Hogan in Texts, Cases and materials; See also Chioma EZE Emem and Amadi Prince Uche, “A New Dawn of Corporate Criminal Liability Law In The United Kingdom: Lessons For Nigeria”, African Journal of Law and Criminology, Vol. 2, No.1, 2012, pp86-98, p87.
See Article 74 (2) of the penal Code of 1965
See Article 330 of pc.
This committee was created by decree no. 2005/0528/PM of 15 February 2005.
See Wankah, (2012), Op Cit, p.41.
See Wankah, Op Cit, P.32.
https://www.goodsill.com/blog/2021/02/how-does-trademark-infringement-harm-your-company/ consulted on the 16/07/2025.
Liability can be defined in the simplest form as legal responsibility for someone’s acts or omissions.
https://www.mccaininstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/civil liability-reading-materials.pdf accessed on the 16/04/2025.
Ibid.
Article 42 of the TRIPs agreement.
https://lawcirca.com/trademark-infringement-and-its-remedies/amp/#top.consulted on the 23/04/2025.
Article 44(1) of the TRIPs agreement.
Roger E. Schecheter and John R. Thomas (2003) op cit p 764.
Rusell L. Parr (2018) op cit p487.
Roger E. Schecheter and John R. Thomas (2003) op cit p 765.
Ibid.
Rodrick Ndi (2017) op cit p 77.
Simon Tabe T (2022), International Labor Law, lecture notes Master I FSJP University of Dschang p294.
(1) Any person with the locus standi to bring action for counterfeiting may make an urgent application to the competent domestic court seeking, if necessary under financial compulsion, an order against the alleged counterfeiter or the intermediaries whose services he uses, instituting any measure intended to prevent an imminent infringement of the rights conferred by the title or to prevent continuation of the alleged counterfeiting.(2)The competent domestic court may also order all urgent measures on application where the circumstance require that such measures should not be taken inter parties, in particular where any delay is likely to cause irreparable harm to the applicant. If sought through an urgent or ex parte application, the court may only order the measures.
Catherine Colston (1999) op cit p 419.
Ralph S. Brown (1992) Civil Remedies for Intellectual Property Invasions: Themes and Variations, Law and Contemporary Problems vol 55 No 2, p 65.
Ibid.
Deborah E.B (2013) op cit p 129.
The court seized of the matter shall determine the amount of the damages, having regard to
the adverse financial effects, including loss of earnings, suffered by the prejudiced party, the
profit made by the counterfeiter and the moral damage caused to the owner of the rights as a result of the infringement.
1. The judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the infringer to pay the right holder
damages adequate to compensate for the injury the right holder has suffered because of an infringement
of that person’s intellectual property right by an infringer who knowingly, or with reasonable grounds
to know, engaged in infringing activity.2. The judicial authorities shall also have the authority to order the infringer to pay the right holder expenses, which may include appropriate attorney's fees. In appropriate cases, Members may authorize the judicial authorities to order recovery of profits and/or payment of pre-established damages even where the infringer did not knowingly, or with reasonable grounds to know, engage in infringing activity.
Ibid.
Article 57 of annex III is to the effect that; (1) The following persons shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 to 30,000,000 CFA francs and by imprisonment for three months to two years, or one of the above penalties alone.
Seize and take legal custody of (vehicle, goods or documents) because of an infringement of a law.
Ferdinand Doh G. (2020) Trademark Law in the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), Jurisdiction under the Bangui agreement of 2nd March, 1977 revised on February 24, 1999, Dayspring Law firm.
Rodrick Ndi (2017) op cit p 74.
Ibid.
(2) The competent domestic court may in all cases order the destruction of goods bearing marks violation of Article 59 above.
Nsahlai Tardini. W (2016) op cit p 102.
Without prejudice to other rights of action open to the right holder and subject to the right of
the defendant to seek review by a judicial authority, competent authorities shall have the authority to
order the destruction or disposal of infringing goods in accordance with the principles set out in Article46. In regard to counterfeit trademark goods, the authorities shall not allow the re-exportation of the infringing goods in an unaltered state or subject them to a different customs procedure, other than in exceptional circumstances.
Balew Mersha and G/Hiwot Hadush (2009), op cit 292.
Article 58 of annex III of the Bangui agreement is to the effect that The following persons shall be punished with a fine of 5,000,000 to 10,000,000 CFA francs and with imprisonment for 15 days to six months, or one of the above penalties alone:(a)persons who do not affix to their goods a mark that has been declared
compulsory;(b)persons who sell or offer for sale goods that do not bear a mark declared compulsory for goods of that type;(c) persons who violate the terms of decisions taken under Article 1 of this Annex; and
(d)persons who incorporate in their marks signs that are prohibited under the provisions of this Annex.
By virtue of article 60(2) of annex III, recidivism shall be deemed to have occurred where the offender has been convicted of one of the offenses specified in this Annex within the preceding five years.
Merchant and Gould (2021), Criminal Liability for Trademark Infringement, a collaborative International study Vol 258 p 32.
(2) the competent court may order publication of its judgment in such media as it may indicate
Section 330(5) of the penal code.
