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

Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
The keenly awaited ruling should act as a ‘call to arms’ for a much-needed evolution of UK copyright law, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
Gift this article