Argentina: Full compensation for damage in trade mark infringement

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

Argentina: Full compensation for damage in trade mark infringement

IP rights – among which is the right of the trade mark owner– enable the holder to exploit with exclusivity certain intangible assets. Every time a misappropriation or trade mark infringement takes place, the owner of the trade mark that is subject to infringement also suffers damage, due to the simple fact that a third party is using a similar or identical trade mark without their consent.

In this regard, judges must adopt a broad criterion when applying the remedy of damages, even when it is difficult to prove those damages concretely.

Obtaining full compensation for the damage caused will discourage the violation of any IP rights by infringers. When applying these laws, judges should therefore endeavour to facilitate proper damages to a greater extent in cases of infringement.

Recent decision

In that sense, it is worth mentioning the recent decision of Division I of the Federal Court of Appeals in Civil and Commercial Matters in H I v DITOYS SA on Cease of use of Trade mark of August 16 2016 that provides a good example of such facilitation.

Damages

In relation to the damages suffered, considering that the defendant made inappropriate use of the plaintiff's trade mark, the first instance judge understood that it was very difficult to accurately prove the loss on the basis of the decrease in the plaintiff's income – because this depended on multiple factors. Thus, he argued that the person that acts improperly has to take the risk of the uncertainty generated by their own action, otherwise there would be a thread of impunity around trade mark infringements.

"Once the existence of infringement has been proven, experience, case-law and doctrine affirm that the trade mark owner suffers damage. Undoubtedly, difficulties are encountered when it comes to proving the damage caused in the field of industrial property. Thus, it would be correct to start from presumed damages."

In its decision, the Court confirmed that the remedy of damages is according to law and also sustained the plaintiff's request and increased significantly the amount for damage compensation.

Daniel R Zuccherino

Obligado & Cia

Paraguay 610, 17th Floor

C1057AAH, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Tel: +54 11 4114 1100

Fax: +54 11 4311 5675

admin@obligado.com.ar

www.obligado.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and empowering women in tech and IP law
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Kevin Mack, Via’s new president, emphasises the importance of collaborative licensing structures and shares how AI tools can help create new lines of business
A Tokyo District Court ruling concerning movie spoilers, and a second chance for VLSI against Intel were also among the top talking points
Practitioners believe new AI tools at the USPTO will not replace lawyers or disrupt revenue, but instead expose where a trademark attorney’s value lies
Leighton Cassidy Legal hopes to leverage its founder's international experience and provide clients with a rare chance to receive litigation and prosecution under one umbrella
UKIPO rejects trademark application for 'Cristiano Ronaldo Origins' following opposition by Beck Greener client in a rare case that considered actual use
Partners at both firms have voted in favour of the tie-up, which marks ‘the largest law firm merger in history’
Gift this article