Africa: The Gambia set to join the Banjul Protocol on Marks

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Africa: The Gambia set to join the Banjul Protocol on Marks

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
dan-roizer-gygpfmxgd1o-unsplash.jpg

Matthew Costard of Spoor & Fisher explains why the Gambia’s ‘British law’ legacy is a cause of concern for ARIPO trademarks

The African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) is one of Africa’s two regional IP registration systems. ARIPO enables IP owners to get protection for their rights in one or more member countries through a central filing together with a designation of the countries of interest. This is in contrast to the African Intellectual Property Organisation (OAPI), which involves a single filing that automatically covers all the member countries.

The treaty that regulates ARIPO trademarks is the Banjul Protocol on Marks. Eleven countries can be covered through an ARIPO trademark registration (Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, São Tomé and Príncipe, Uganda, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe).

On May 4 2021, ARIPO announced that the Gambia will be the 12th trademark member country, and will join the Banjul Protocol on Marks with effect from August 3 2021. What this means is that as of August 3 2021, trademark owners will be able to designate the Gambia in an ARIPO trademark application.

Yet trademark owners should be wary. The Gambia is what is sometimes known as a ‘British law country’. The effect of this is that international treaties do not become part of the Gambian law until such time as they are specifically enacted in local legislation. The Banjul Protocol on Marks has not been incorporated in any legislation in the Gambia, and this means that any designation of the Gambia in an ARIPO trademark application will have no effect. Purported trademark registrations will be open to attack.

It is worth noting that there is a draft law in the Gambia that does incorporate the Banjul Protocol into the Gambian law (An Act to Repeal The Industrial Property Act 2007, see Section 61(13)). It is not known when this will come into effect, although local sources are hopeful that the bill will be tabled at the next sitting of the National Assembly and that it will be enacted before August 3 2021. Until such a time when the draft law is in force, the safest course for trademark owners will be to use the national trademark system.

 

Matthew CostardDirector, Spoor & FisherE: m.costard@spoor.co.uk  

 

 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
Gift this article