Tanzania closes key trademark law gaps: what brand owners need to know

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Tanzania closes key trademark law gaps: what brand owners need to know

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
Flag of Tanzania in a map of Africa
Shutterstock

Nola Pontes of Spoor & Fisher Jersey examines Tanzania’s trademark law reforms, including recognition of ARIPO registrations, protection for well-known marks, and broader opportunities for brand owners

Tanzania has moved to close its African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) enforceability gap and modernise its trademark system.

In September 2025, Tanzania’s Court of Appeal held that ARIPO trademark registrations designating mainland Tanzania are not enforceable, because provision for ARIPO trademarks under the Banjul Protocol on Marks had not been incorporated into the Trade and Service Marks Act, 1986. Within a month of the Court of Appeal’s decision, at the request of Tanzania’s trademarks registry, ARIPO declared mainland Tanzania ineligible for designation.

Tanzania’s response came in just over a year. The Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, No. 6 of 2026 took effect from October 2 2026, amending the Trade and Service Marks Act, 1986 by including a new Section 28A making provision for ARIPO trademarks under the Banjul Protocol.

ARIPO recognition

The amendment now gives domestic effect to ARIPO trademark registrations designating Tanzania and refers back to September 1 1999, when the Banjul Protocol entered into force in respect of Tanzania. The stated aim is to make these rights enforceable.

However, some uncertainty remains. In particular, the legislation does not expressly address how recognition of historical ARIPO registrations will interact with national rights that accrued before the amendments took effect this month. How competing rights will be treated remains to be seen.

ARIPO is now working through the operational next steps to lift the suspension. In response to Spoor & Fisher’s enquiry this week, it has confirmed that it is consulting with the Tanzanian trademarks registry and will issue an official notice once those discussions conclude. Until that notice is issued, brand owners should treat Tanzania as unavailable for designation.

Beyond ARIPO, the amendments also introduce a number of wider changes to Tanzania’s trademark framework.

A broader definition of a trademark

The previous requirement for a trade or service mark to be a “visible sign” has been removed. A trade or service mark is now defined as “any sign or combination of signs capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings”. A sign is now defined to include three-dimensional marks, letters, words, colours, and combinations of colours, numerals, get-ups, and holograms.

Collective and certification marks

The law now expressly provides for collective and certification marks. This gives associations, industry bodies, and certification organisations a route to protecting marks that indicate membership, standards, or other certified characteristics.

Well-known marks

The amendments introduce a clearer statutory framework for well-known marks.

To qualify, a mark must be well known in Tanzania and be entitled to protection under the Paris Convention or TRIPS Agreement.

When deciding whether a mark is well known, the registrar will consider all relevant circumstances. These include:

  • The level of recognition of the mark;

  • The duration and geographical extent of its use and promotion;

  • Relevant registrations and applications;

  • The record of successful enforcement; and

  • The value associated with the mark.

The amendments also provide that a mark should not be registered where it, or an essential part of it, is likely to impair, interfere with, or take unfair advantage of the distinctive character of a well-known mark.

For brand owners, this provides an additional layer of protection. However, well-known status still depends on evidence and, where Tanzania is commercially important, registration remains the clearest and most reliable route to protection.

Earlier advertisement

Where the registrar considers that exceptional circumstances exist, an application may now be advertised before acceptance.

What constitutes exceptional circumstances is not defined, so it remains to be seen how the provision will operate in practice. The stated aim is to give the public an opportunity to comment before an application is accepted.

For rights holders, this may mean that potentially conflicting applications come to light earlier in the registration process.

What should brand owners do now?

Now is a good time to review trademark protection in mainland Tanzania.

The broader definition of a trademark may allow you to protect signs that were previously difficult to register. Associations and certification bodies should consider whether the new provisions for collective and certification marks are relevant to them.

Existing ARIPO registrations designating Tanzania should form part of that review. Until ARIPO issues its official notice, the national filing route remains the available route for securing a new trademark registration in mainland Tanzania.

Zanzibar should not be overlooked. It operates a separate trademark registration system and protection there should continue to be secured separately.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
Gift this article