Court Orders MTN To Pay N840m For Trademark Infringement On WebPlus

Justice Daniel Osiagor of the Federal High Court in Lagos has ruled in favour of Citilink Accesscorp Limited, ordering MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd. and the Registrar of Trademark, Patent & Designs to pay N840 million in damages for infringing on the company’s registered trademark, ‘WEBPLUS’.

The court found MTN guilty of unauthorized use of the “WEBPLUS” trademark, which was lawfully registered by Citilink under Class 9 of the Trademark Registry.

Justice Osiagor issued a perpetual injunction prohibiting MTN and the Registrar from registering or issuing any certificates for “WEBPLUS,” “WEB+,” “MTN WEBPLUS,” or any similar variations under Classes 9, 16, and 38.

In suit number FHC/L/CS/1124/2014, Citilink Accesscorp Limited, represented by its counsel Azubuike Obiekwe, sought the following legal reliefs: “A declaration that it is the sole legal owner of the “WEBPLUS” trademark under Registration RTM No. 65162.

A ruling that MTN’s use of “MTN WEBPLUS” or “WEB+” constitutes trademark infringement.

A perpetual injunction preventing MTN and the Registrar from issuing or registering any similar marks.

MTN’s legal team, led by Fidelis Adewole, argued that the defence of honest concurrent use applied in this case.

They contended that even if the trademarks were similar, MTN had used the mark without deceptive intent and in good faith, urging the court to dismiss the claims.

In his judgement Justice Osiagor rejected MTN’s defence and ruled in favour of Citilink, granting the following reliefs:

“General damages of N840 million, calculated at N70 million per year from 2014 to 2025, for loss of business and brand dilution. An additional 15% annual interest will be applied until the judgment is fully paid.

A perpetual injunction restraining MTN from using the “WEBPLUS” trademark.

Justice Osiagor however refused request for special damages, including legal fees, due to insufficient proof.

The court reaffirmed that the Federal High Court has exclusive jurisdiction over trademark infringement cases under Section 251(1)(f) of the 1999 Constitution. Citing Omnia (Nig.) Ltd v. Dyke Trade Ltd (2007) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1058) 576 SC, the judgment emphasized that all trademark disputes fall within the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction.

Additionally, the court ruled that merely adding a company’s name (such as “MTN”) to an existing trademark does not remove the likelihood of confusion, citing Draper v. Trist (1939) All E.R 513 (C.A.).

With this judgment, MTN is now permanently barred from using “WEBPLUS” or any similar name, solidifying Citilink Accesscorp Limited’s exclusive rights over the trademark.