Brazil: Trade dress enforcement is still strong in Brazil

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

Brazil: Trade dress enforcement is still strong in Brazil

Sponsored by

daniel-400px.png
Designer sketching drawing design Brown craft cardboard paper product eco packaging mockup box development template package branding Label . designer studio concept .

Brazil's legal system provides several options for IP owners to enforce their rights. Trade dress protection is not expressly foreseen in our law but falls within general unfair competition rules which basically forbid competitors to fraudulently divert third parties' clientele.

Preliminary injunctions (PIs) are widely available and can be granted ex parte and without the need to post a bond. PIs have been consistently granted in trade dress cases, although no trade dress registration is available in Brazil.

However, a decision from Brazil's Superior Court of Justice (SCJ) at the end of 2017 changed this trend. The decision basically stated that trade dress infringement should not be decided based on the judge's subjective perspective so that an opinion from a court's technical expert was warranted.

Although such SCJ decision is not formally binding, lower courts started rejecting PIs on trade dress cases based on the argument that a court's expert opinion could not be issued at such early stages and, therefore the plaintiff's claims were not strong enough to merit a PI.

However, the SCJ decision expressly mentioned that the expert report could be waived if unnecessary based on other produced evidence. Put another way, in cases where the plaintiff provides alternative evidence which is strong enough, PIs can still be granted.

Lower courts have now adjusted their understanding and PIs are once again being granted at the State Courts of Rio and São Paulo. Plaintiffs must show evidence that the infringed trade dress is not common and that similarity between products may mislead consumers. This can be achieved by comparing available products and obtaining an independent consumer survey.

André Oliveira

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article