PUMA strikes back at counterfeit trade in Sri Lanka

Wednesday, 5 November 2025 00:24 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

PUMA SE, a global pioneer in the sportswear industry, has successfully obtained four enjoining orders from the Commercial High Court of Colombo against connected suspected entities engaging in the sale of counterfeit goods.

The company, represented by its registered Attorneys-at-Law, Sudath Perera Associates, initiated civil litigation against the entities “SAFFANS”, “Saffans Mens Shoes Ltd.”, “Saffans Bridal Shoes Ltd.” and “Saffans Shoes Ltd.” under the provisions of the Intellectual Property Act No. 36 of 2003.

The actions were based on allegations that the defendants were involved in the sale of counterfeit goods unlawfully bearing PUMA SE’s registered trademarks, including the iconic “PUMA” name and the leaping cat logo.

In its pleadings, PUMA SE emphasised that the defendants, being notable retailers in the footwear industry, were aware or ought to have known that the products in question were not genuine PUMA trademark goods. The brand further argued that the unauthorised use of marks identical or deceptively similar to its well-known trademarks was intended to mislead the public and exploit the reputation associated with its globally recognised branding elements, including the PUMA word mark, the cat logo, and the Form Strip.

The plaintiff argued that genuine PUMA products are distinguished by their high standards of quality and manufacturing excellence, in contrast to the inferior quality of the counterfeit goods being sold. The circulation of such subpar items under the guise of authenticity was said to be causing substantial and irreparable damage to the brand’s goodwill and public trust.

After reviewing the submissions and arguments presented, Judge Amali Ranaweera and Judge Chamath Madanayake of the Commercial High Court (Holden in Colombo) issued enjoining orders prohibiting the defendants, along with their agents, representatives, employees, or any party acting on its behalf, from producing, importing, marketing, selling, or otherwise dealing in any merchandise bearing names, marks, or logos that are identical or confusingly similar to PUMA’s registered trademarks.

PUMA SE was represented in court by Counsel Manoj Bandara AAL and Gimhani Hettiarachchi AAL, on the instructions of Sudath Perera Associates.