News
Trademark infringement: Court awards sh60m to Spot Clean
The judge said the name “Spot Wash” is confusingly similar to “Spot Clean” and that its incorporation under that name was an act of registry inadvertence that must now be cured.
Trademark infringement: Court awards sh60m to Spot Clean
By: Farooq Kasule, Journalist @New Vision
________________
The Commercial Division of the High Court in Kampala has ordered Spot Wash (SMC) Limited and its director, Amon Kakama, to pay sh60m to Spot Clean Dry Cleaners Limited over trademark infringement as the business rivalry between the two firms turns ugly.
In a judgment dated June 29, 2026, High Court judge Susan Odong ruled that Spot Wash infringed on Spot Clean’s registered trademark by using in the course of trade signage and a get-up that nearly resembles its mark in a manner likely to cause confusion among their customers.
“A declaration is made that by using its current “Spot Wash drycleaners” signage and get-up, Spot Wash is passing off its business as that of or as associated with the Spot Clean’s business. I award the Plaintiff (Spot Clean) sh40m as general damages and sh20m as exemplary damages to deter future look-alike tactical rebranding,” Justice Odong ruled.
The judge said the name “Spot Wash” is confusingly similar to “Spot Clean” and that its incorporation under that name was an act of registry inadvertence that must now be cured.
“Pursuant to section 88 of the Trademarks Act, I hereby order that Spot Wash be expunged from the Register of Trademarks forthwith,” Justice Odong said.
The judge said the name “Spot Wash” is confusingly similar to “Spot Clean” and that its incorporation under that name was an act of registry inadvertence that must now be cured.
“Pursuant to section 88 of the Trademarks Act, I hereby order that Spot Wash be expunged from the Register of Trademarks forthwith,” Justice Odong said.
The judge also ordered Spot Wash to surrender all infringing signage, flyers, branded stationery and promotional materials for destruction and change its name to one that does not contain the word “SPOT” in conjunction with laundry or dry-cleaning terms.
The judge said the registration of Spot Wash as a trade name was invalid at law as it conflicted with and infringed on Spot Clean’s earlier registered mark.
The judgement arises from a suit filed by Spot Clean Limited alleging trademark infringement, passing off and wrongful use of a confusingly similar company name by Spot Wash.
Incorporated on March 20, 2002, Spot Clean accused Spot Wash of using its distinctive get-up features where the letters “SP_T” are red and the “O” is a blue spot with a white sparkle, appearing above the term “DRYCLEANERS” in white block letters on a blue rectangular background and rebranded them, adopting red “SP_T” letters, a stylised blue “O” as a focal point and a white- on-dark “DRYCLEANERS” banner.
The judge said the registration of Spot Wash as a trade name was invalid at law as it conflicted with and infringed on Spot Clean’s earlier registered mark.
The judgement arises from a suit filed by Spot Clean Limited alleging trademark infringement, passing off and wrongful use of a confusingly similar company name by Spot Wash.
Incorporated on March 20, 2002, Spot Clean accused Spot Wash of using its distinctive get-up features where the letters “SP_T” are red and the “O” is a blue spot with a white sparkle, appearing above the term “DRYCLEANERS” in white block letters on a blue rectangular background and rebranded them, adopting red “SP_T” letters, a stylised blue “O” as a focal point and a white- on-dark “DRYCLEANERS” banner.