Trademark Infringement in Bangladesh: Remedies, Enforcement and Case Examples (2026)

Trademark infringement Bangladesh: the 2026 enforcement map

Trademark infringement Bangladesh brand owners face in 2026 rarely looks like a single act of copying. It is a look-alike bottle on a supermarket shelf, a former distributor still trading under the principal's name, a container of counterfeit cosmetics at Chattogram port, a cybersquatted .bd domain, or a marketplace seller using a famous logo in paid advertising. The Trademarks Act 2009 gives the owner of a registered mark a full set of civil and criminal remedies, and the common law of passing off protects goodwill in unregistered marks and trade dress. The difficulty is choosing the right combination quickly and proving the case well.

This guide is for brand owners and rights holders who need to act. It covers infringement and passing off, the courts, civil remedies, the criminal offences in sections 73 to 79, customs measures under the Customs Act 2023, mobile courts, cease-and-desist strategy, domain names, evidence and the leading cases. For the wider framework of patents, designs, copyright and geographical indications, see our overview of intellectual property law in Bangladesh.

Summary: A registered trademark owner in Bangladesh can sue for infringement in the District Judge's court and ask for an injunction plus either damages or an account of profits; an unregistered owner relies on passing off in the same court. Criminal complaints under sections 73 and 74 of the Trademarks Act 2009, consumer-law prosecutions, mobile courts and customs seizures under the Customs Act 2023 run alongside the civil claim, and the strongest enforcement programmes use several routes at once.

Key point: Speed and evidence decide most cases. Courts grant interim injunctions on a prima facie case, and in the PARACHUTE coconut-oil dispute the District Judge, Dhaka, granted an ex parte status quo order against a look-alike blue bottle that the High Court Division left in place in 2022. Arrive with registrations, dated test purchases and side-by-side comparisons already assembled.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

What the Trademarks Act 2009 treats as infringement

Registration under the Trademarks Act 2009 gives the registered proprietor the exclusive right to use the mark in relation to the registered goods or services.[1] Section 26 defines when that right is infringed. The starting point is use, in the course of trade, of a mark that is identical with or deceptively similar to the registered mark, by a person who is neither the registered proprietor nor a registered user.[2] A "deceptively similar" mark is one that so nearly resembles a registered mark that it is likely to deceive or cause confusion.[1]

The three core situations

Section 26(2) identifies three combinations: an identical mark used on similar goods or services, a similar mark used on identical goods or services, and an identical mark used on identical goods or services. In each case the use must be likely to confuse the public or suggest a connection with the registered proprietor.[2] Courts compare the marks as an ordinary purchaser would meet them, focusing on overall impression rather than a side-by-side audit of differences, and a likelihood of confusion is enough without proof that anyone was actually deceived.[9] [10]

Well-known marks and dissimilar goods

A mark that is well known in Bangladesh is protected beyond its own field. Section 26(3) treats use of an identical or similar mark on different goods or services as infringement where the use is without due cause and takes unfair advantage of, or harms, the distinctive character or reputation of the well-known mark. Section 26(7) adds that use of a mark that suggests a connection with the owner of a well-known mark, and is likely to damage its interests, also infringes.[2] Whether a mark is well known is assessed by reference to section 10, which looks at knowledge of the mark among the relevant public, including knowledge gained through promotion in Bangladesh.[1]

What counts as use

Section 26(4) gives "use" a wide meaning. It includes affixing the mark to goods or packaging, offering or exposing goods for sale, putting them on the market or stocking them for those purposes, offering or supplying services under the mark, importing or exporting goods under the mark, and using the mark on business papers or in advertising.[2] A warehouse holding stock or an importer clearing a consignment can infringe before a single unit is sold.

Acts that are not infringement

Section 27 lists acts that do not infringe, including use outside the limits of the registration and dealing in goods that were lawfully put on the market under the mark.[1] Section 26(8) also gives a defendant a narrow escape from an injunction where it proves that the use is not likely to deceive or cause confusion, or does not indicate a connection in trade with the proprietor.[2] Exhaustion is limited: the Chambers 2026 guide reports that only goods imported with the owner's consent may be freely resold, which gives brand owners a footing against unauthorised parallel imports.[8]

Passing off and unregistered marks

Section 24(1) bars any proceeding to prevent, or recover damages for, infringement of an unregistered trademark. Section 24(2) then preserves the right of action against a person who passes off goods or services as those of another.[1] Passing off is therefore the route for unregistered marks, for marks still pending at the Department of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, and for features of a product that a registration does not cover. Where the mark is registered, plead infringement and passing off together, so that the claim survives an attack on the registration.

The elements

The claimant must show goodwill or reputation attached to its goods or services, a misrepresentation by the defendant likely to lead the public to believe that the defendant's goods are the claimant's, and actual or likely damage. The High Court Division has restated the classic principle that "a man is not to sell his own goods under the pretext that they are the goods of another man".[10] Priority of use is often decisive: a reported 2015 High Court Division decision described "who is the earlier user" as the paramount question in a trademark dispute.[9]

Trade dress, colour and shape

Courts now look beyond words and logos. The Chambers 2026 guide reports that Bangladeshi courts consider trade dress, get-up, colour combinations and bottle shapes, and that the High Court Division has upheld an injunction against a deceptive colour combination and bottle shape even where the word marks differed.[8] The High Court Division also treated the statutory definition of "mark" as non-exhaustive and capable of covering colour combinations.[10] Packaging, bottle profiles and colour schemes deserve the same attention in an enforcement plan as the brand name itself.

Where to sue for trademark infringement Bangladesh claims

Section 96 provides that no suit for infringement of a registered trademark, for any right in a registered trademark, or for use of a mark identical with or deceptively similar to another mark, whether registered or not, may be instituted in any court below the court of the District Judge.[1] Infringement and passing off suits therefore begin before the District Judge or an Additional District Judge with territorial jurisdiction, usually where the defendant carries on business or where the infringing goods are sold. Appeals lie to the High Court Division and then to the Appellate Division.[8] See our guide to filing a civil suit in Bangladesh.

Commercial courts and pre-suit mediation

The Commercial Court Ordinance 2026, since replaced by the Commercial Courts Act 2026 (Act No. 23 of 2026), lists intellectual property rights among the commercial disputes it covers. It provides for specialist commercial courts staffed by District and Additional District Judges, commercial appellate benches in the High Court Division, compulsory mediation before a suit is filed and a ninety-day limit for concluding trial from the date fixed for final hearing.[14] As courts are notified district by district, every new trademark infringement Bangladesh claim should be checked for jurisdiction and any mediation step, without letting either delay urgent interim relief.

Validity challenges go to the High Court Division

Section 98 requires the validity question to be decided on an application for rectification of the register, filed in the High Court Division.[1] Under section 102, the trial court may stay the suit until a pending rectification is decided or, where none is pending and the invalidity plea appears prima facie tenable, frame an issue and adjourn for three months so that a rectification application can be filed. Section 102(5) expressly preserves the court's power to grant interim injunctions, order accounts, appoint a receiver or attach property while the suit is stayed.[1]

Civil remedies: injunctions, damages and account of profits

For trademark infringement Bangladesh law offers a familiar menu of civil relief. Section 97(1) sets out the relief available in a suit for infringement or passing off. The court may grant an injunction and, at the option of the plaintiff, either damages or an account of profits, and may order that infringing labels and marks be delivered up for destruction or erasure.[3] In most brand cases the injunction is the remedy that matters. A permanent injunction should be drafted to cover manufacture, import, storage, online listing and sale of the specific marks and trade dress at issue, so that it can be enforced without argument.

Temporary and ad interim injunctions

Interim relief is sought by application with the plaint under the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff must show a strong prima facie case, irreparable harm that damages cannot repair, and a balance of convenience in its favour.[8] Courts usually require notice to the defendant; ex parte orders are reserved for clear counterfeiting with imminent harm.[8] Where the evidence is strong, though, courts do act fast: in the PARACHUTE case an ex parte ad interim status quo order was passed and later sustained on appeal.[10] Our analysis of temporary injunctions in Bangladesh explains how to frame the application.

Damages or an account of profits

The plaintiff must elect between damages, measured by its own loss, and an account of profits, which strips the defendant's gains from the infringing trade.[3] Damages suit provable lost sales; an account suits a defendant with large, documented sales. Because there is no formal discovery in Bangladeshi IP litigation, either measure usually depends on the plaintiff's own market data and forensic accounting evidence.[8]

Limits for innocent infringers

Section 97(2) bars damages and an account of profits in three situations: where the mark is a certification trademark; in an infringement suit, where the defendant proves it did not know and had no reasonable ground to believe the plaintiff's mark was registered, or stopped using the mark once it learned of the plaintiff's rights; and in a passing off suit, where the defendant proves it did not know the plaintiff's mark was in use and stopped on learning of it.[3] This is why a cease-and-desist letter matters: once it is served, the defendant can no longer claim ignorance.

Delivery up, costs and limitation

Beyond destruction of labels under section 97(1), the losing party usually pays both sides' costs, although amounts vary widely.[8] Infringement suits must generally be filed within three years of the cause of action, typically measured from discovery.[8] Delay also invites defences of laches and acquiescence.[8]

Criminal remedies under the Trademarks Act 2009

Chapter X of the Trademarks Act 2009, sections 71 to 89, creates the criminal offences.[1] In trademark infringement Bangladesh practice, criminal enforcement suits counterfeiters, whose stock and machinery can be seized and who are rarely worth suing for money, and it often brings infringers to settlement faster than a civil suit.

Section 73: falsifying and falsely applying marks

Section 73 punishes any person who falsifies a trademark, falsely applies a trademark to goods or services, makes, disposes of or possesses a die, block, machine, plate or other instrument for falsifying a mark, applies a false trade description, misstates the country or place of manufacture or the name and address of the maker in breach of section 108, alters or removes a genuine indication of origin, or causes any of those acts. The penalty is imprisonment of six months to two years, or a fine of Tk 50,000 to Tk 2 lakh, or both. A second or subsequent conviction carries one to three years, or a fine of Tk 1 lakh to Tk 3 lakh, or both.[4]

Section 74: selling counterfeit goods

Section 74 applies the same penalty scale to selling, exposing for sale or possessing for sale goods bearing a false trademark or false trade description. The seller escapes liability if it proves that it took reasonable precautions and had no reason to suspect the mark, that it disclosed on demand everything it knew about its supplier, or that it acted innocently.[1] A retailer that names its supplier gives the investigation its next target.

Sections 75 to 78: related offences

Section 75 penalises removing piece goods in breach of the textile provisions. Section 76 punishes representing an unregistered mark as registered, with imprisonment of six months to one year or a fine of Tk 50,000 to Tk 1 lakh, or both. Section 77 covers falsely describing a place of business as connected with the Trademarks Office, and section 78 covers falsification of entries in the register.[1] Under section 83(1), offences under sections 76, 77 and 78 may be taken up only on a written complaint by the Registrar or a person the Registrar authorises.[1]

Forfeiture, trial and time limits

On a conviction under section 73 or 74, or even an acquittal where the accused established a statutory defence, the court may order the goods and instruments forfeited to the Government, and after conviction may order them destroyed.[1] Offences are tried only by a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class, who may impose the full fines the Act prescribes.[1] A prosecution must be started within three years of the offence or two years of its discovery by the complainant, whichever expires first.[1]

Choosing between civil and criminal routes

Magistrates can punish and forfeit, but cannot grant an injunction binding a competitor's future conduct or award damages. For counterfeit networks the best results come from combining a raid and criminal complaint with an injunction suit against the manufacturer and importer; a good-faith competitor is better met with a civil claim.

Counterfeits, consumer law and mobile courts

Counterfeiting is widespread in Bangladesh. The United States International Trade Administration's March 2026 country guide reports that counterfeit goods are readily available, that police act on complaints but rarely open independent investigations, and that weak coordination among agencies makes raids slow and costly.[7]

The Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009

Many counterfeit cases are prosecuted as consumer offences rather than trademark offences. Section 50 of the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009 punishes anyone who makes or produces counterfeit goods with imprisonment of up to three years, a fine of up to Tk 2 lakh, or both.[11] It suits cases where the fakes are also unsafe, such as cosmetics, food and medicines.

Mobile courts

Mobile courts under the Mobile Court Act 2009 allow executive magistrates to try scheduled offences on the spot. They may impose the fine the relevant law prescribes but no imprisonment exceeding two years.[12] The Consumer Rights Protection Act is among the scheduled laws, and the Copyright Act 2023 separately applies the mobile court regime to copyright offences.[8] [12] Mobile courts deliver same-day fines, seizure and destruction, but no injunction and nothing that binds the supplier behind the shop.

Customs border measures under the Customs Act 2023

In trademark infringement Bangladesh enforcement, the border is often the most efficient point at which to stop imported counterfeits. Section 17(1) of the Customs Act 2023 prohibits the import and export of goods bearing a counterfeit trademark or a false trade description, adopting the definition of false trade description in section 2(5) of the Trademarks Act 2009. The same section covers counterfeit geographical indications and goods made in infringement of patent or copyright.[5]

The IPR enforcement rules

The National Board of Revenue's Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement (Import and Export) Rules 2019, gazetted in November 2019, let a rights holder lodge a notice with the customs commissioner identifying its rights and suspected infringing consignments. The notice is valid for one year, customs must say within thirty days whether it is accepted, and the rights holder must furnish a security bond and supporting IP documents. Customs may also act on its own initiative.[6]

If the allegation proves unfounded, the goods must be released within twenty-four hours and the rights holder bears the costs of detention, port charges and destruction; if infringement is proved, the importer or exporter bears them and the goods may be seized or destroyed.[6] The NBR began consulting on revisions to the rules on 23 December 2024.[7] Check the current text before filing.

Practical points at the border

Applications are commonly made to the Customs Intelligence and Investigation Directorate with registration certificates, details of the goods and suspected importers and genuine samples, so officers can tell real from fake.[8] Section 109 of the Trademarks Act 2009 also lets the customs commissioner at the port of entry, on application, order an importer of goods suspected of bearing a false mark to produce documents and the names and addresses of the consignor and consignee within fourteen days, and pass that information to the registered proprietor.[1] Our guide to customs law in Bangladesh explains the wider regime.

Cease-and-desist letters and pre-action strategy

A cease-and-desist letter served early, and drafted precisely, can secure undertakings to stop use, delivery-up of stock, withdrawal of a conflicting application or a rebrand on an agreed timetable. Mediation or a warning letter is commonly encouraged before a trademark suit.[8] The letter also defeats the innocent-infringer defence in section 97(2), because the defendant can no longer say it did not know.[3] Against counterfeiters, though, a letter only warns the target to move stock; raid or file first and write afterwards.

Groundless threats

Letters must be accurate. Unfounded threats of infringement proceedings may expose the sender to an unfair competition claim, and a recipient may seek a declaration of non-infringement under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.[8] State the registrations, the acts complained of and the demands precisely. Our guide to legal notices in Bangladesh covers form, service and timing.

Domain names and online infringement

Bangladesh has no internet-specific trademark rules; the Trademarks Act applies online as it does offline.[8] Use of a mark "in advertising" and offering goods for sale are both forms of use under section 26(4), so sponsored listings, social-media shops and marketplace storefronts can all infringe.[2]

.bd domains

The .bd country-code domain is run by Bangladesh Telecommunications Company Limited, and there is no UDRP-style administrative procedure for .bd disputes, so court action is the main route.[13] The best-known example is Facebook's 2020 suit against the registrant of facebook.com.bd, which joined BTCL as a defendant, sought cancellation of the domain and damages, and reportedly obtained an injunction from a Dhaka court in December 2020.[13] Against a cybersquatted .bd name, plead infringement and passing off, join the registry and seek an order freezing transfer pending trial.

For .com and other generic domains, the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy is usually faster than litigation, and platform notice-and-takedown procedures are the quickest tool against marketplace sellers. See our guide to e-commerce law in Bangladesh.

Evidence that wins trademark infringement Bangladesh cases

A trademark infringement Bangladesh court decides interim applications on affidavits and documents, often at the first hearing. The case has to be ready before filing.

• Title: certified copies of registrations and renewals, assignments and registered-user entries. Registration is prima facie evidence of validity under the Trademarks Act 2009.[1]
• Use and reputation: dated sales figures, invoices, advertising spend, media coverage and market-share data, with international registrations and use for a well-known mark claim.[9]
• The infringement: dated test purchases, photographs of stock, and dated screenshots of online listings.
• Comparison: side-by-side images of marks, packaging, colours and shape, as an ordinary purchaser would see them.
• Confusion: customer complaints, misdirected enquiries and, where secondary meaning is in issue, consumer surveys.[8]
• Loss: expert evidence on damages and forensic accounting for an account of profits.[8]

Because there is no formal discovery, the plaintiff cannot count on extracting the defendant's documents later.[8] Investigators should be ready to give evidence in person at trial.

Notable trademark infringement cases in Bangladesh

Many trademark infringement Bangladesh disputes settle after the interim stage, so reported judgments are relatively few. These decisions show how the courts approach the issues.

Marico v Asian Consumer Care: trade dress and the blue bottle

In Asian Consumer Care (Pvt) Ltd v Marico Limited, First Miscellaneous Appeal No. 76 of 2021, decided by the High Court Division on 14 March 2022, Marico sued in the court of the District Judge, Dhaka, in Title Suit No. 30 of 2020 for a permanent injunction under sections 96, 97 and 24(2), relying on its PARACHUTE word marks, registered trade dress and blue bottle designs against a Dabur-branded coconut oil in a blue bottle.[10]

The District Judge granted an ex parte ad interim status quo order and refused to vacate it. The High Court Division dismissed the appeal. It held that similarity need not be exact, that the question is whether ordinary consumers may be confused into thinking the goods are connected with the plaintiff, and that likelihood of confusion is enough. It rejected, at the interim stage, the argument that blue had become common to coconut oil, and noted that the trial court had relied on the overall bottle, shape and trade dress rather than colour alone.[10]

Earlier authorities on confusion

In reaching that view the High Court Division relied on Jamal Uddin Ahmed v Abdul Haque, 55 DLR (2003) 102, for the principle that a likelihood of confusion suffices, and on N.L. Chem. Inds. v Registrar, Trade Mark, 13 DLR (1961) 657, and A.B. Biscuit Co. Ltd v Haque Brothers Ltd, 36 DLR (1984) 107.[10] The Chambers 2026 guide also reports an Appellate Division decision at 73 DLR (AD) 33 confirming that the test is whether the public risks confusion or deception, without proof of actual confusion.[9]

Bad-faith agents, earlier use and transborder reputation

The same guide reports decisions holding that a former agent who claimed ownership of the principal's mark to obtain registration committed a fraud on the Registrar (60 DLR (AD) 161); that use of an essential part of a mark is liable to cause confusion (6 ALR 300); that the requirement of a local market presence has faded and the original owner's interests should be protected (57 DLR 93); and that earlier use is the paramount question (4 SCOB [2015] HCD 89). It also reports a 2024 High Court Division judgment protecting a mark on the strength of international registrations, advertising and use.[9] The trend favours genuine first users and foreign brand owners.

Building a brand enforcement programme

One-off actions remove one infringer; a programme changes the market. This is how we structure it.

Swipe or scroll →

Registration is the foundation for all of this. Infringement remedies, the presumption of validity, criminal complaints and customs notices all work better with a Bangladeshi registration covering the right classes. Our guide to trademark registration in Bangladesh covers filing at the DPDT, and our trademark registration and advisory practice handles clearance and portfolio work.

Comparing the enforcement routes

Each route answers a different problem. On a phone, scroll the table sideways.

Enforcement is most effective when the civil suit, the criminal complaint and the customs notice are planned together, so that evidence gathered on one route supports the others. Our IP disputes and enforcement practice runs coordinated actions of this kind, working with our customs and trade compliance team at the border.

Trademark infringement Bangladesh: what to watch in 2026

Three developments will shape enforcement over the coming year. First, the roll-out of commercial courts under the Commercial Courts Act 2026 and its compulsory pre-suit mediation will change where and how IP suits are filed. Second, the NBR's revision of the 2019 customs IPR rules should align border enforcement with the Customs Act 2023.[7] [14] Third, as Bangladesh prepares for LDC graduation, trading partners continue to press for stronger action against counterfeits.[7]

The practical message does not change: register in the right classes, watch the market, keep evidence of use current and move quickly. To discuss a dispute, contact TRW.

Frequently asked questions

What counts as trademark infringement in Bangladesh?

Using a mark identical with or deceptively similar to a registered trademark in the course of trade, on identical or similar goods or services, in a way likely to cause confusion. Use includes stocking, importing and advertising, and well-known marks are protected beyond their own goods.[2]

Can I sue if my trademark is not registered in Bangladesh?

Not for infringement. Section 24 bars infringement actions on unregistered marks but preserves passing off, which protects goodwill and trade dress.[1]

Which court hears a trademark infringement suit?

Section 96 requires the suit to be filed no lower than the court of the District Judge. Check whether a commercial court now has jurisdiction.[1] [14]

What remedies can a court grant?

An injunction plus, at the plaintiff's option, damages or an account of profits, and delivery up of infringing labels and marks for destruction.[3]

How quickly can I get an injunction?

Quickly where the evidence is strong. Courts usually require notice, but ex parte orders are possible in clear cases, as the PARACHUTE dispute shows.[8] [10]

What are the criminal penalties for counterfeiting a trademark?

Under sections 73 and 74, six months to two years' imprisonment or a fine of Tk 50,000 to Tk 2 lakh, or both; on a repeat conviction, one to three years or Tk 1 lakh to Tk 3 lakh. Goods can be forfeited under section 79.[1] [4]

Is there a time limit for a trademark complaint?

A criminal prosecution must start within three years of the offence or two years of discovery, whichever is earlier. Civil infringement suits are generally subject to a three-year limitation period.[1] [8]

Can customs stop counterfeit goods at the border?

Yes. Section 17 of the Customs Act 2023 prohibits import and export of goods with counterfeit marks or false trade descriptions, and the 2019 IPR rules let rights holders lodge a one-year notice with customs, backed by a security bond.[5] [6]

How do I recover a .bd domain that uses my trademark?

There is no UDRP-style procedure for .bd domains, so the usual route is a civil suit for infringement and passing off joining BTCL, the registry, as in the facebook.com.bd case.[13]

Should I send a cease-and-desist letter before suing?

Usually, against a legitimate competitor: it often settles the matter and defeats the innocent-infringer defence. Against counterfeiters, act first.[3]