How to Enforce Trademarks Under Zambia's Trade Marks Act, Practical 2026 Guide for Owners and Litigators

The Trade Marks Act Zambia landscape changed decisively on 26 December 2025, when Statutory Instrument No. 86 of 2025 brought the Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023 fully into force. Brand owners, in-house counsel and litigators now operate under a modernised regime that introduces multi-class applications, protection for service and non-traditional marks, overhauled opposition and cancellation procedures at PACRA, and strengthened enforcement remedies in the High Court. This guide provides a litigation-focused enforcement playbook, the concrete procedural steps, timelines, evidence checklists and court tactics needed to protect trademark rights in Zambia during 2026 and beyond.

What to do now, quick action checklist

• Audit your portfolio. Identify every legacy registration filed under the repealed 1958 Act and confirm its status with PACRA.
• Convert or re-file. Determine whether existing marks need conversion or fresh applications under the new Act’s transitional provisions.
• Check class coverage. The new multi-class trademark Zambia system may allow consolidation, but fees remain payable per class.
• Monitor the Journal. Watch PACRA’s Trade Marks Journal for conflicting applications and be ready to oppose within statutory deadlines.
• Prepare opposition files. Assemble evidence of use, reputation and goodwill now, before a deadline forces a rush.
• Map enforcement routes. Decide whether your dispute belongs at PACRA (administrative opposition or cancellation) or in the High Court (injunction, damages, criminal complaint).
• Seek interim relief early. If infringement is active, ex parte or urgent interlocutory applications in the High Court can halt damage while the main action proceeds.
• Engage local counsel. On-the-ground litigation experience with PACRA procedures and the Zambian High Court is critical to effective enforcement.

Consult the Zambia lawyer directory, Intellectual Property on Global Law Experts to connect with qualified IP litigators who can advise on your specific portfolio.

Background and Scope of the Trade Marks Act Zambia (No. 11 of 2023)

Zambia’s trademark framework had been governed by the Trade Marks Act of 1958 for over six decades. The Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023, enacted by Parliament in November 2023, represented the first comprehensive overhaul of the system. However, the Act did not take immediate effect upon enactment. It was brought into force on 26 December 2025 by SI No. 86 of 2025, a Ministerial commencement instrument published via PACRA’s official notices.

The 2023 Act aligns Zambia with contemporary international Intellectual Property, practice area overview standards. It introduces several features that were absent under the prior regime: multi-class applications in a single filing, express protection for service marks Zambia had previously struggled to accommodate, recognition of non-traditional marks (including sound, colour and shape marks), modernised grounds for refusal and invalidity, and a substantially strengthened enforcement toolkit including updated criminal sanctions.

For rights-holders, the practical significance is immediate. Every legacy registration, every pending application and every enforcement strategy must now be assessed against the new Act’s provisions and PACRA’s updated procedures.

Key legislative dates and effects

Who Has Jurisdiction? PACRA, High Court and Appeals

Understanding where to bring your claim is the first tactical decision under the Trade Marks Act Zambia framework. The Act establishes a dual-track system: administrative proceedings before the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), and judicial proceedings in the High Court of Zambia.

PACRA handles trademark opposition Zambia matters, cancellations, revocation proceedings and administrative disputes relating to registration. It is the starting point for challenges to pending applications and for actions to remove marks from the register on grounds of non-use, bad faith or invalidity. PACRA trademark procedures are governed by the Act itself and by subsidiary regulations and practice notices issued by the Registrar.

The High Court has jurisdiction over infringement actions, applications for interim and interlocutory relief (injunctions, Anton Piller-type orders, asset-preservation orders), claims for damages or account of profits, and criminal prosecutions for trademark offences. Appeals from PACRA decisions are also directed to the High Court, making it the ultimate arbiter of trademark litigation Zambia disputes.

When to start at PACRA versus going straight to court

If the dispute concerns a pending application that should not proceed to registration, file an opposition at PACRA within the prescribed notice period. If the mark is already registered and is being infringed, enforcement through the High Court is generally the faster route to injunctive relief. Where both registration validity and active infringement are in issue, it is common to run parallel proceedings, a cancellation action at PACRA alongside an infringement claim in the High Court. Coordinating both tracks requires careful case management to avoid inconsistent outcomes.

Conversion and Transitional Rules, Step-by-Step for Legacy Registrations

One of the most pressing questions for existing trademark holders is whether they need to re-file or convert registrations under the new Act. The Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023 includes transitional provisions designed to preserve rights acquired under the repealed 1958 Act, but those provisions impose conditions that rights-holders must satisfy.

The general principle is that marks validly registered under the old Act continue in force and are treated as if registered under the new Act. However, the transition is not entirely automatic. Rights-holders should take the following steps to protect their positions:

• Action step: Conduct a full portfolio audit. Identify every Zambian registration, its current class(es), renewal status and any pending applications. Cross-reference against PACRA’s updated register.
• Action step: Verify class alignment. The new Act adopts the current edition of the Nice Classification. If a legacy registration used an outdated classification, confirm that PACRA has mapped it correctly to avoid scope gaps.
• Action step: Check renewal status. Trademark renewal fees Zambia obligations continue under the new regime. If a mark is due for renewal, ensure compliance with the new fee schedule published by PACRA. Missed renewals risk removal from the register with limited restoration options.
• Action step: File any necessary conversion documentation. Where PACRA guidance requires submission of updated particulars (for example, to reflect multi-class consolidation or to update proprietor details), file promptly. Delays may create priority vulnerabilities.
• Action step: Consider fresh applications for expanded protection. The new Act’s recognition of service marks and non-traditional marks means that brand elements previously unregistrable (sounds, colours, shapes, motion marks) can now be filed. This is an opportunity, not just a compliance task.

Transitional action table

Key pitfall: Industry observers expect that rights-holders who take a passive approach, assuming all legacy marks will automatically transfer without any action, risk discovering gaps only when they need to enforce. The prudent course is to treat the transition as an active compliance project, not a background administrative event.

PACRA Procedures, Oppositions, Cancellations and Revocations Under the Trade Marks Act Zambia

The new Act establishes a structured framework for challenging trademark applications and existing registrations at PACRA. For brand owners seeking to prevent conflicting marks from reaching the register, or to clear the register of marks that should never have been granted, these PACRA trademark procedures are the primary administrative tools.

Filing an opposition, step-by-step

A trademark opposition Zambia proceeding is initiated after PACRA publishes the application in the Trade Marks Journal. The key procedural steps are:

1. Monitor the Journal. PACRA publishes accepted applications for opposition purposes. Systematic monitoring is essential, once the opposition window closes, the mark proceeds to registration.
2. File a Notice of Opposition. The notice must be filed at PACRA within the prescribed statutory period following publication. It should set out the grounds of opposition clearly, referencing the specific provisions of the Act relied upon (for example, relative grounds based on an earlier mark, or absolute grounds such as descriptiveness or bad faith).
3. Serve the applicant. The opponent must serve a copy of the Notice of Opposition on the applicant or their agent of record.
4. Applicant files a counter-statement. The applicant has a prescribed period to file a counter-statement setting out the basis on which they defend the application.
5. Evidence rounds. Both parties file evidence in support of their respective positions. This typically involves statutory declarations or affidavits exhibiting proof of use, reputation, sales data, marketing expenditure and examples of confusion.
6. Hearing. If the matter is not resolved on the papers, PACRA schedules a hearing. Both parties may be represented by legal practitioners or registered trademark agents.
7. Decision. The Registrar issues a written decision, which is subject to appeal to the High Court.

Sample Notice of Opposition checklist

• Full details of the opponent (name, address, nationality, registration numbers of earlier marks relied upon)
• Identification of the contested application (application number, publication date, applicant details)
• Grounds of opposition with specific statutory references under the Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023
• Statement of the facts relied upon (chronology of use, evidence of reputation, instances of confusion)
• List of supporting evidence to be filed (statutory declarations, exhibits, expert reports)
• Details of the authorised representative filing the opposition

Defending oppositions, rebuttal evidence and strategy

If you are the applicant facing an opposition, the counter-statement is your first opportunity to narrow the issues. Identify the specific grounds raised and address each one. Where the opponent relies on alleged reputation, demand particularised evidence of use in Zambia, not merely global usage. Where the ground is descriptiveness, prepare evidence demonstrating acquired distinctiveness through use. Consider whether a partial defence (restricting the specification of goods or services) might resolve the opposition without the cost of a full hearing.

Cancellations and revocations

The Act also provides mechanisms for removing marks from the register after registration. A cancellation action may be brought on the basis that the mark was wrongly registered (for example, in breach of absolute or relative grounds). A revocation action targets marks that have not been put to genuine use within a prescribed period. Both proceedings are initiated at PACRA and follow a similar procedural framework to oppositions, with evidence rounds and a hearing before the Registrar. Industry observers expect revocation for non-use to become an increasingly important tool for clearing deadwood from the register as the new regime matures.

Trade Marks Act Enforcement Remedies, Injunctions, Damages, Criminal Sanctions

The enforcement remedies available under Zambia’s new Act represent a significant upgrade from the prior regime. Trademark enforcement Zambia actions can now draw on a wider range of civil and criminal tools.

Civil remedies

• Injunctions. The High Court may grant permanent injunctions restraining infringement. Interim and interlocutory injunctions are available on an urgent basis (discussed in detail below).
• Damages. A successful plaintiff may recover compensatory damages reflecting actual loss caused by the infringement, including lost sales, damage to reputation and reasonable royalties.
• Account of profits. As an alternative to damages, the rights-holder may elect an account of profits, requiring the infringer to disgorge profits attributable to the infringing use. This is particularly useful where the infringer’s profits exceed the rights-holder’s provable losses.
• Delivery up and destruction. The court may order delivery up of infringing goods, labels, packaging and materials, and their destruction or disposal.
• Additional damages. Where the infringement is flagrant or the infringer has benefited substantially, the court may award additional damages to reflect the gravity of the conduct.

Criminal sanctions

The Act introduces updated criminal provisions for serious trademark offences, including counterfeiting and the deliberate application of a registered mark to goods or services without authorisation. Criminal proceedings can be a powerful deterrent, particularly in counterfeit goods cases, and may be pursued in parallel with civil enforcement.

When to seek account of profits versus damages

The choice between damages and an account of profits is a tactical one. Damages suit situations where the rights-holder can demonstrate clear, quantifiable loss, for example, diverted sales with a documented margin. An account of profits is preferable when the infringer has operated at scale and generated significant revenue, but the rights-holder’s own losses are difficult to quantify (for instance, where the rights-holder does not yet trade in Zambia but holds a registration). The election is typically made after disclosure of the infringer’s financial records, so early applications for disclosure are critical to an informed decision.

Interim Relief and Urgent Procedures, Drafting Orders and Court Tactics

Speed is often the decisive factor in trademark litigation Zambia. Where infringement is active and ongoing, waiting for a trial date is commercially unacceptable. The High Court’s powers to grant interim and interlocutory relief are the rights-holder’s most important weapon in the early stages of enforcement.

The standard test for interlocutory relief in Zambia follows established common-law principles: the applicant must demonstrate a serious question to be tried, that damages would not be an adequate remedy, and that the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction. In cases of exceptional urgency, for example, counterfeit goods about to enter the market or an imminent trade fair, ex parte applications (without notice to the respondent) may be made.

Practical steps for seeking interim relief

• Action step: Assemble the evidence bundle immediately. The court will require a founding affidavit supported by documentary evidence of the registration, evidence of infringement (photographs, purchase receipts, online listings, investigator reports) and evidence of urgency.
• Action step: Draft the order sought with precision. Specify exactly what conduct must be restrained, identify the respondent(s) by name and address, and include ancillary relief such as preservation of evidence or disclosure of supply chains.
• Action step: Address the undertaking as to damages. The court will ordinarily require the applicant to give an undertaking to compensate the respondent if the injunction is ultimately found to have been wrongly granted. Be prepared to demonstrate the applicant’s financial standing.
• Action step: File and serve promptly. Use the High Court’s urgent procedures, ensure the application is placed before a judge without delay and that the respondent is served in accordance with the Rules.

Evidence checklist for injunction hearings

• Certified copy of the trademark registration certificate
• Evidence of use of the mark in Zambia (sales records, marketing materials, distribution agreements)
• Evidence of infringement (trap purchases, photographs of infringing goods, screenshots of online listings, investigator reports with chain-of-custody documentation)
• Evidence of urgency and irreparable harm (market reports, customer confusion instances, loss of control over quality)
• Financial evidence supporting the undertaking as to damages
• Expert evidence (if available) on the likelihood of confusion or the counterfeit nature of the goods

Border measures and customs coordination

The Act supports enforcement at the border, enabling rights-holders to work with the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) to intercept infringing goods at points of entry. The practical steps for effective border enforcement include:

• Register with ZRA. File details of your registered marks and known infringing patterns with the customs authority, including images, product descriptions and known routes of entry.
• Provide intelligence. Share specific shipment information where available, consignment numbers, expected arrival dates, shipping origins and consignee details.
• Respond rapidly to detention notices. When ZRA detains suspected infringing goods, the rights-holder typically has a limited period to inspect the goods and confirm infringement before initiating formal proceedings or the goods are released.
• Coordinate with PACRA. Ensure that your registrations are current and that PACRA records match the details filed with ZRA.

Case Management and Trial Phase, Evidence, Experts, Costs and Remedies

Where a trademark enforcement Zambia dispute proceeds to trial in the High Court, thorough preparation is the single greatest determinant of success. The High Court follows standard civil procedure, but trademark cases present specific evidential and tactical challenges.

Pleadings and case management

The statement of claim should identify the registered mark, the infringing conduct, and the remedies sought with precision. Particulars of infringement, specifying each infringing act, the goods or services involved and the dates, are essential. Vague or catch-all pleadings invite strike-out applications and delay. Early case management conferences should be used to agree on directions for evidence, expert reports and the trial timetable.

Evidence that persuades

• Witness statements from consumers or trade witnesses demonstrating actual confusion between the registered mark and the infringing sign
• Survey evidence (conducted in accordance with accepted methodologies) showing the level of recognition and the likelihood of confusion among relevant consumers in Zambia
• Forensic and expert evidence comparing the marks, analysing the goods and assessing the channels of trade
• Financial records, both the rights-holder’s (to prove lost sales) and the infringer’s (to support a claim for account of profits)
• Investigator reports documenting the chain of acquisition, storage and sale of infringing goods, with photographic and video evidence

Costs and settlement

Costs in Zambian civil proceedings generally follow the event, the losing party pays the winning party’s assessed costs. However, party-and-party costs rarely cover the full expense of litigation. Budget accordingly and factor in the possibility of settlement. Consent orders, endorsed by the court, can provide binding terms including undertakings, damages by agreement, delivery up and costs. A well-timed offer to settle, backed by strong evidence, can resolve disputes efficiently and preserve commercial relationships.

Practical Drafting and Contractual Tips to Avoid Disputes

Prevention is cheaper than enforcement. Rights-holders operating under the Trade Marks Act Zambia should embed protective provisions into their commercial arrangements:

• Assignment clauses. Ensure that any transfer of trademark rights is documented in writing, executed by both parties and registered with PACRA to be effective against third parties.
• Licence agreements. Include quality control provisions (essential to maintain the validity of the mark), territory definitions aligned with the Zambian registration, and clear termination and post-termination use restrictions.
• Monitoring obligations. Assign responsibility for watching the Trade Marks Journal for conflicting filings and for conducting periodic market audits for infringing use.
• Cease-and-desist protocols. Establish internal templates and escalation procedures so that infringement detected in the market is addressed promptly, with a documented chain of correspondence that can be exhibited in later proceedings.

Conclusion and Recommended Immediate Actions Under the Trade Marks Act Zambia

The operationalisation of the Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023 marks a turning point for Lawyer practice area: Intellectual Property in Zambia. Rights-holders who act now will secure the strongest possible position, those who wait risk priority gaps, missed opposition windows and unchecked infringement.

Seven-point immediate action plan:

1. Complete a portfolio audit of all Zambian registrations and pending applications against the new Act’s requirements.
2. File conversion documentation or fresh applications for service marks and non-traditional marks as early as possible.
3. Establish systematic monitoring of the PACRA Trade Marks Journal for conflicting applications.
4. Pre-assemble opposition and enforcement evidence files so that deadlines can be met without scrambling.
5. Map your enforcement route, PACRA administrative proceedings, High Court litigation, or parallel tracks, for each active or anticipated dispute.
6. Review and update all licence agreements, assignment documentation and internal cease-and-desist protocols.
7. Engage qualified Zambian IP litigation counsel through the Zambia lawyer directory, Intellectual Property to advise on your specific portfolio and enforcement priorities.

Sources

1. WIPO Lex, Trade Marks Act, 2023 (Act No. 11 of 2023)
2. PACRA, Trade Marks Act PDF
3. PACRA, Official Notices (SI No. 86 of 2025)
4. ZambiaLII, Trade Marks Act No. 11 of 2023
5. Parliament of Zambia, Act No. 11 of 2023 (PDF)
6. CWB IP, Zambia Implements New Trade Marks Act (2026)
7. Adams & Adams, Zambia Ushers In a New Era with Its Modernised Trade Marks Act
8. INTA, Zambia Trade Marks Act of 2023 Marks a Paradigm Shift in IP Rights