Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
Justice Binta Murtala‑Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division, has issued an interlocutory injunction restraining Mamuda Beverages Nigeria Limited from further producing its Pop Power Energy Drink, ruling that the bottle design of the product bears a “striking resemblance” to the trademarked Fearless Energy Drink manufactured by Rite Foods Limited. The court also refused a preliminary objection filed by Mamuda Beverages, which had challenged the suit on grounds of abuse of court process. Delivering the ruling on the motion for interlocutory injunction in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/705/2025, Justice Nyako held that the design of Mamuda’s recently introduced bottle still appears, on its face, to closely mimic the established trade dress of Rite Foods’ Fearless Energy Drink, creating a likelihood of consumer confusion. The judge therefore ordered Mamuda to cease production of Pop Power Energy Drink forthwith, to destroy all existing infringing products, and directed the court bailiff, in conjunction with the parties, to undertake an inventory of the products slated for destruction and file the same with the court. The injunction is to remain in force until the end of the year or until the final determination of the substantive suit, whichever is earlier. The court adjourned the suit to Wednesday, September 23, 2026, for the hearing of the substantive matter.
The latest ruling is not the first legal confrontation between the two beverage companies over the Pop Power brand. In January 2025, Rite Foods initiated legal proceedings against Mamuda, alleging that the launch of Pop Power Energy Drink infringed on the trademark and overall design identity of its iconic Fearless Energy Drink. That suit resulted in a consent judgment, under which Mamuda agreed to cease all further violation of Rite Foods’ trademark and trade dress, to destroy all infringing products, and to redesign its packaging to avoid any form of identity imitation. The terms of settlement were entered as a consent judgment of the court.
However, according to Rite Foods, Mamuda subsequently reintroduced Pop Power Energy Drink into the market with only cosmetic adjustments to its appearance. Rite Foods argued that these changes were minor and did little to address the original issues of consumer confusion. The company further submitted that market feedback indicated the new Pop Power product continued to be informally referred to as “small Fearless,” a fact that, according to Rite Foods, reinforced concerns that the revised product breached the spirit of the earlier agreement and undermined consumer clarity and brand differentiation. Rite Foods therefore returned to court, alleging that Mamuda had circumvented the earlier consent judgment and was once again engaged in trademark infringement and passing off. In the motion for interlocutory injunction, Rite Foods sought to restrain Mamuda from further production, distribution, and sale of the Pop Power Energy Drink pending the final determination of the suit.
In its notice of preliminary objection, Mamuda Beverages had urged the court to strike out the suit, arguing that the present complaint of infringement was distinct from the earlier suit and that Rite Foods’ action amounted to an abuse of court process. Justice Nyako, however, rejected this argument. The judge found that the current suit concerned the same parties and substantially the same subject matter – the imitation of the Fearless Energy Drink trade dress – and that Mamuda’s reintroduction of a minimally altered product after a consent judgment constituted a fresh act of infringement that warranted judicial intervention. Having refused the preliminary objection, the court proceeded to evaluate Rite Foods’ application for injunctive relief. Applying the standard test for interlocutory injunctions, the judge held that Rite Foods had established a prima facie case of trademark infringement, that the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction, and that damages would not be an adequate remedy if the injunction were refused. The court therefore granted the order restraining Mamuda from further production of Pop Power Energy Drink and ordered the destruction of existing stocks.
While reaffirming its position, Rite Foods stressed its continued commitment to protecting its brand and the principles of innovation and fair competition in Nigeria’s marketplace. The company emphasized that genuine business growth must be anchored on originality and respect for intellectual property, rather than imitation and fraudulent business practices. Mamuda Beverages has not publicly commented on the ruling, but its legal team is expected to file a defence in the substantive suit now scheduled for September. The case highlights the challenges of enforcing intellectual property rights in Nigeria’s fast‑moving consumer goods sector, where lookalike products and brand imitation have become increasingly common. It also serves as a cautionary tale for companies that seek to exploit the goodwill of established brands through minor product redesigns after having entered into a consent judgment. With the injunction now in force and the destruction of existing Pop Power products imminent, the legal battle between the two beverage giants is far from over.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments