Nepal’s enforcement provision is one section long. It is penal rather than compensatory, it is administered by the Department, and it reaches three kinds of conduct — one of which has no equivalent elsewhere in the region.
Quick reference
| The provision | Section 19 |
| Conduct caught | Breach of section 16(2), use of a mark cancelled under section 18(3), breach of section 18B |
| Penalty | A fine not exceeding one hundred thousand rupees |
| Goods | Articles and goods connected with the offence may be confiscated on the orders of the Department |
| Assessment | According to the gravity of the offence |
| Unregistered marks | No statutory action — section 21B makes a foreign registration invalid in Nepal unless registered there |
What section 19 covers
Section 19, as amended:
In case any one who violates Sub-Section (2) of Section 16, or brings into use a trade-mark which has been cancelled under Sub-section (3) of Section 18, or violates Section 18B, may be punished with a fine not exceeding One Hundred Thousand Rupees and articles and goods connected with such offense confiscated on the orders of the Department as per the gravity of offense.
Three limbs, and they are worth separating.
Limb one: using another’s registered mark
Section 16(2) prohibits copying or using, or causing to be used, in the name of others, a trademark registered in the name of any person under the Act — without transforming the ownership or written permission pursuant to section 21D.
So the core prohibition is tied to the register and to the transfer and permission machinery. The lawful ways to use someone else’s registered mark are a transfer of ownership or written permission, both of which run through section 21D and a joint application to the Department. See assignment and licensing in Nepal.
Note what the provision is built around: a mark registered in the name of any person. It is not framed as a likelihood-of-confusion test over similar marks and similar goods.
Limb two: using a cancelled mark
Bringing into use a trademark that has been cancelled under section 18(3) — that is, cancelled because the Department was satisfied one of the refusal grounds existed, after a show-cause opportunity.
So cancellation is not merely the loss of a right. Continuing to use the mark afterwards is penalised. See trademark cancellation in Nepal.
Limb three: using an unregistered mark as registered
Section 18B is short and unusual:
No trade-mark may be used as a registered trade-mark without registering it at the Department.
Breach of it is an offence under section 19.
This is the Nepali version of the false-representation offence that exists in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, and it is drafted more broadly than either. It is worth saying plainly to a business arriving from a market where using the registered symbol early carries no penalty: in Nepal it is an offence attracting a fine and confiscation of goods.
The remedy
A fine not exceeding one hundred thousand rupees, and confiscation of the articles and goods connected with the offence, on the orders of the Department, according to the gravity of the offence.
Two observations.
It is penal, not compensatory. The Act does not provide for damages, an account of profits, delivery up to the rights holder, or an injunction in the terms the neighbouring statutes use. The sanction runs to the state and to the goods, not to the complainant’s loss.
The Department orders confiscation. The provision puts the Department at the centre of enforcement rather than a court, which is consistent with the rest of the Act — registration, cancellation, complaints and transfers all sit with the Department.
Where a rights holder needs compensation or an injunction, the route is outside this section and depends on the general law and the forum available for it. That is a question to take locally rather than to assume from a neighbouring jurisdiction’s provisions.
Registration is the precondition
The Act leaves little room for an unregistered position.
Section 16(1): title to a trademark is acquired upon registration at the Department.
Section 18B: no mark may be used as a registered trade-mark without registering it.
Section 21B: title to a trademark registered in a foreign country shall not be valid in Nepal unless registered in Nepal by the person concerned.
So the practical answer to “what can I do about someone using my brand in Nepal if I have not registered it there?” begins with registering it — and section 21C gives a route for that, allowing the Department to register a foreign-registered mark without enquiries on production of the foreign certificate, with the Paris Convention facility extended to the holder. See foreign trademarks in Nepal.
What the Act does not provide
Stated explicitly, because enforcement is the area where descriptions borrowed from neighbouring systems are most misleading:
- no civil infringement action with damages or an account of profits;
- no statutory injunction provision;
- no delivery-up to the rights holder — the Act provides for confiscation on the Department’s orders;
- no passing off or unfair competition provision in the Act;
- no well-known marks provision — the nearest is the refusal and cancellation ground concerning undermining the reputation of another person’s trademark;
- no customs recordal provision in the Act; and
- no criminal procedure detail of the search-and-seizure kind found in the Sri Lankan and Pakistani statutes.
Where the Act is silent, other Nepali law and Departmental practice govern, and both are matters to confirm locally at the time.
Practical approach
Register first, and in the right categories. The whole of section 19 is built on registration.
Keep the registration alive. Seven-year terms, a 35-day renewal window from expiry, and the one-year use rule all mean a Nepali registration needs more active management than most. See trademark renewal in Nepal.
Document the infringement for the Department. Since confiscation is ordered by the Department and the penalty is assessed on the gravity of the offence, the quality of the material put before it matters.
Do not use the registered symbol before registration. Section 18B makes that an offence in its own right.
Frequently asked questions
What is the penalty for trademark infringement in Nepal? A fine not exceeding one hundred thousand rupees, with the articles and goods connected with the offence liable to confiscation on the orders of the Department, according to the gravity of the offence.
Can I claim damages for infringement in Nepal? The Act does not provide for damages or an account of profits. Its remedy is a fine and confiscation of goods.
Is it an offence to use a mark as registered before registering it? Yes. Section 18B prohibits using a trademark as a registered trademark without registering it at the Department, and section 19 makes a breach punishable.
Can I enforce an unregistered mark in Nepal? The Act gives no statutory action for an unregistered mark, and a foreign registration is expressly not valid in Nepal unless registered there.
What are the lawful ways to let someone else use my Nepali mark? A transfer of ownership or written permission under section 21D, both effected through a joint application to the Department.
Is using a cancelled trademark an offence? Yes. Bringing into use a mark cancelled under section 18(3) is one of the three limbs of section 19.
Useful official resources
- Department of Industry, Nepal
- Patent, Design and Trade Mark Act, 2022 (1965) — sections 16, 18, 18B, 19, 21B, 21C, 21D
- Nepal Law Commission
See our related notes on trademark cancellation in Nepal, assignment and licensing and foreign trademarks in Nepal.
Dealing with misuse of your brand in Nepal? Talk to us.