GEORGINA ACHIAA VS LESFAM COMPANY LTD & ORS
June 5, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ADELAIDE ABUI KEDDEY
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Intellectual Property Law
- Commercial Law
June 5, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This High Court Commercial Division ruling concerns an interlocutory motion by the Ghana‑based sole agent for Mast‑Jägermeister SE’s Jägermeister, seeking to restrain various market actors from importing, dealing in, and selling Jägermeister without purchasing through her, alleging unfair competition under Act 589. The Applicant supported the motion with exhibits including trademark registration and prior judgments affirming her rights. The 3rd, 4th, and 6th Respondents opposed; the 1st, 2nd, and 5th did not respond. Applying Order 25 Rule 1 of C.I. 47 and the three‑part test (serious question, irreparable harm, balance of convenience), the court recognized the Applicant’s protectable right but found inadequate evidence of infringement by the 3rd, 4th, and 6th Respondents. The court therefore granted the injunction only against the non‑responding Respondents and dismissed it as to the opposing Respondents, with no order as to costs.
The Plaintiff (hereinafter called the Applicant) filed a Motion on Notice for an Order of Interlocutory Injunction with a 25-paragraph supporting affidavit dated 13th March, 2023.
In this application, the Applicant alleges that the Respondents have engaged in unfair competition by putting up for sale on the Ghanaian market the very Jägermeister product in respect of which she is the sole and exclusive agent to sell in Ghana. In so doing, the Defendants (hereinafter called Respondents) are representing to all of plaintiff’s customers that they are selling goods belonging to the plaintiff. Counsel for Applicant submitted that the said acts by Respondents cause confusion by reason of their putting up for sale on the Ghanaian market the Jägermeister product. That the said acts are likely to damage the goodwill or reputation of Plaintiff’s enterprise whether or not the act or practice causes confusion.
The Applicant is therefore praying the court to restrain Respondents and their agents etc. from dealing in, importing into, trading, marketing and selling the said herb liqueur in Ghana without purchasing same from the applicant on one hand and to restrain the Respondents whether by themselves, their agents or otherwise from enabling, assisting, causing, procuring or authorizing others to trade, market and sell the herb liqueur in Ghana without purchasing same from the Applicant.
All the Respondents herein were served with the instant application. However, the 3rd and 4th Respondents [IMEXCO GHANA LTD & COMET GHANA LTD] filed their Affidavit in Opposition dated 9th May, 2023, whilst the 6th Respondent [LIQUIDS AND WINES] prayed to rely on their previous Affidavit in Opposition filed on 11th November, 2022.
In opposing the instant application, the 3rd and 4th Respondents aver that the court ruled that Exhibit ‘E’ relating to the Power of Attorney was invalid and having so declared, Exhibit ‘E’ cannot form the basis of the present application. Further to that, the Respondents denied importing and selling Jägermeister without purchasing from the Applicant and the averment that the importation and sale of the said product in Ghana constitute unfair competition because the applicant is the sole and exclusive agent. Respondents stated further that in an application for injunction, it is not enough for the Applicant to demonstrate a legal or equitable right to be protected. The Applicant must demonstrate that the Respondents have indeed breached or threatened to