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

Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Firm says appointment of Nick McDonald will boost its expertise in cross-border disputes, including at the Unified Patent Court
In the final episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss the IP Inclusive Charter and the senior leaders’ pledge
Law firms are integrating AI to remain competitive, and some are noticing an impact on traditional training and billing models
IP partners are among those advising on Netflix's planned $82.7bn acquisition of Warner, which has been rivalled by a $108.4bn bid by Paramount
Gift this article