MTN Nigeria Communications Limited has been fined for infringing on the registered trademark “WEBPLUS,” owned by Citilink Accesscorp Limited.

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court in Lagos fined MTN N840m.

Justice Aluko, who imposed the fine while delivering judgment on a suit marked HC/L/CS/1124/2014 filed by Citilink, held that MTN’s use of “MTN WEBPLUS” or “MTN WEB+” unlawfully mimicked the plaintiff’s trademark.

The judge awarded N70 million yearly damages, covering Citilink’s loss of business and brand dilution from 2014 to 2025.

The court also ordered MTN to pay the applicant 15 per cent interest per annum on the judgment sum until it is fully paid.

Citilink Accesscorp Limited, in a suit filed on July 17, 2024, accused MTN Nigeria of infringing on its trademark “WEBPLUS,” which was legally registered in 2001 under Class 9 and renewed in 2014.

Citilink had argued that MTN’s use of “MTN WEBPLUS” and similar variants constituted unauthorised usage, misleading the public and damaging its brand.

The applicant joined the Registrar of Trademarks, Patent Designs, as a defendant, representing all entities involved in the production, marketing, and sale of the infringing services.

The applicant had urged the court for a declaration that Citilink Accesscorp Limited is the sole legal owner of the “WEBPLUS” trademark.

The applicant further asked the court for a perpetual injunction restraining MTN from further use of “WEBPLUS” in any form and an order preventing the Registrar of Trademarks from issuing any trademark rights to MTN under “WEBPLUS” or any variation of it.

But MTN Nigeria challenged the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that a pending case at the Trademark Tribunal made the lawsuit invalid.

The company also claimed that its application for “MTN WEBPLUS” was made in 2012, when Citilink’s trademark registration had lapsed (between 2008 and 2014).

While stating that the applicant failed to prove trademark infringement, the telecommunications firm insisted that its use of “WEBPLUS” was an honest concurrent use, meaning it had no intention to deceive.

It further stated that the applicant lacked sufficient evidence to justify its financial claims.

In his ruling, Justice Aluko rejected MTN’s defence and upheld the applicant’s infringement claims.

However, the court denied some of the applicant’s additional demands, including the request for the seizure and destruction of MTN’s servers and a claim for N10 million in special damages due to insufficient proof.

Justice Aluko also granted a perpetual injunction against MTN, barring the telecom giant from further use of the disputed trademark.