A welcome return to the world of trademarks in Somalia

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

A welcome return to the world of trademarks in Somalia

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
flag-2529106-1920.jpg

Matthew Costard of Spoor & Fisher welcomes the news that trademark registration is possible, once again, in Somalia

For many years it was not possible to register trademarks in Somalia, an east African state with a population of roughly 16 million. This was a consequence of a brutal civil war that started in 1991 and continued for many years. The best that international brand owners could do was publish cautionary notices in Somalian newspapers.

Things have, however, been changing for some time. In December 2019, it was announced that the Registry, the Somali Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), had re-opened. The pre-1991 legislation is again recognised, although we understand that new IP legislation (with transitional provisions that will recognise existing rights) is in the pipeline. The pre-1991 legislation is the Trade Mark Law No. 3 of January 22 1955, amended by Law No. 33 of January 18 1975 and Law No. 3 of December 8 1987.

In short, trademark registration is again possible. 

Here are some important features of the current trademark registration system: 

  • The working language of SIPO is English;

  • As Somalia is not a member of the Paris Convention, priority claims are not possible;

  • A pre-filing search is mandatory – this search will be conducted by SIPO; 

  • The Nice classification system is followed and a separate application must be filed for each class of goods and/or services; 

  • In compliance with local Islamic law, it is not possible to cover alcoholic or pork products;

  • As for formalities, the following documentation is required: a power of attorney (simply signed); a copy of the applicant’s business registration certificate or equivalent; a copy of a home or foreign trademark registration; a company profile setting out the applicant’s business activities and jurisdiction of operation. All these documents must be in English or accompanied by an English translation;

  • Trademark applications are examined on absolute and relative grounds;

  • Trademark applications are advertised online;

  • There is provision for opposition – the opposition term is 45 days;

  • The registration term is 10 years; and

  • There is provision for trademark infringement claims. Remedies available to the trademark owner include damages and an order for the destruction of infringing goods. 

The situation regarding the pre-1991 registrations is unclear. Some believe that these registrations are no longer recognised. Others claim that these registrations can be revalidated on payment of an official fee of $1,000 for each renewal term. This is a grey area and you should speak to a professional specialising in African IP if you wish to explore this issue further.

The fact that the trademark registration system is again functioning is very good news, especially for those international brand owners who think that post-civil war Somalia may be a country worth investing in!

 

Matthew Costard

Partner, Spoor & Fisher

E: m.costard@spoor.co.uk

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

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
The court ruled against the owner of the ‘Umbro’ mark, despite noting that post-sale confusion can be a legitimate ground for infringement
Shem Otanga discusses the importance of curiosity and passion, and why he would have loved to have been a professional recording artist
Practitioners say the Bombay High Court shouldn’t have refused well-known trademark recognition for TikTok simply because the app is banned in India
In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Gift this article