The Rite Foods has dragged Mamuda Beverages Nigeria Limited before Federal High Court sitting in Abuja in a fresh trademark infringement suit.
In January, 2025, the plaintiff initiated legal action against Mamuda following an alleged violation of terms of settlement and consent judgement previously agreed to by both parties.
Rite Foods alleged that Mamuda infringed on the trademark and design elements of its Fearless Energy Drink with the launch of a similar-looking product, Pop Power Energy drink.
The court however granted injunctive reliefs, including Anton Piller orders, after which Mamuda opted for a settlement.
However, in a consent judgement dated March 4, 2025, with suit no: FHC/ABJ/CS/139/2025, Justice I.E Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja upheld the terms of settlement between the plaintiff, and the defendant.
Ruling on the matter, the Judge restrained the defendant whether by itself, or through its Directors, Alter-egos, Officers, Servants, Agents, Privies, Distributors or any other person(s) howsoever described in connection with the Defendant, from infringing the Plaintiff’s registered design by engaging in the trade or business of manufacturing, supplying, distributing or selling in Nigeria, its “pop power” energy drink products not emanating or manufactured by the Plaintiff, but closely resembling, similar to and/or identical in design to the Plaintiff’s registered bottle design No: NG/DS/NT/2020/1099 and capable of being offered for sale to the public as the Plaintiff’s energy drinks product.
It ordered the defendant whether by itself, or through its Directors, Alter-egos, Officers, Servants, Agents, Privies, Distributors or any other person(s) howsoever described in connection with the Defendant, from infringing the Plaintiff’s registered trademark by engaging in the trade or business of manufacturing, supplying, distributing or selling in Nigeria, its “pop power” energy drink products not emanating or manufactured by the Plaintiff, but closely resembling, similar to and/or identical in design to the Plaintiff’s registered trademark no.38227 and capable of being offered for sale to the public as the Plaintiff’s energy drinks product.
The Judge also ordered for the delivery up for destruction of the offending ‘pop power” energy products and all the products held to be infringing the Plaintiff’s registered design and trademark, in the possession, custody and/or control of the defendant.
Counsels to plaintiff, B.B Lawal, S.A Liman and A.A Umar adopted the terms of Settlement and Counsel for the defendant, O.E Offiong, SAN, Lydia Oyewo and Nguevese neither opposed.
Meanwhile, in a letter dated 3rd of April, 2025 addressed to counsel for defendant, O.E,B Offiong, solicitor to the Plaintiff, Wale Babalakin, SAN alleged violation of the Terms of Settlement and the Consent Judgement.
The letter read in part, “It has come to our attention that your client has continued to produce its “pop power” energy drinks product with a striking resemblance to our client’s product in clear violation of the Terms of Settlement and the Consent Judgement. While we acknowledge that certain modifications have been made in compliance with items 1(a)-(d) of the Terms of Settlement-specifically, the change of borderlines from yellow to white and the replacement of the word “Classic” with “Original”-other key terms have not been complied with.
On the fresh matter before the court, contrary to some media misinterpretations, Rite Foods’ ex parte motion before the Federal High Court was not denied. Rather, the Court elected to first hear Mamuda’s preliminary objection—a procedural step that does not affect the substance or merits of Rite Foods’ case.
Reports from the market indicate that the new Pop Power continues to be informally referred to as “small Fearless,” reinforcing concerns that the revised product may not only breach the spirit of the earlier agreement but could also undermine consumer clarity and brand differentiation.
The major concern of Rite Foods Limited is consumer protection as most Fearless Energy consumers erroneously mistake a lower quality product for their market leader product.”
Responding to the allegations of non-compliance to the settlement terms, counsel for the defendant, O.E.B Offiong said his client has not in anyway contravened the terms of Settlement and the Consent judgement.
He said, “Our client takes seriously its obligations under the Terms of Settlement and Consent of Judgement and is scrupulously observing it as a law-abiding corporate citizen in Nigeria.”
and then