Preliminary Injunctions for Trademarks in Argentina: How and When to Seek Provisional Relief

When a company detects the unauthorized use of its trademark in the Argentine market —particularly when products with identical or similar signs are already being sold— Argentine law allows registered trademark owners to request preliminary injunctions even before initiating the main legal proceedings.
These remedies, based on Section 50 of the TRIPS Agreement and Section 38 of the Argentine Trademark Law, aim to prevent irreparable harm and preserve the effectiveness of future judgments.

Argentine courts may swiftly order provisional measures, including:
-Suspension of infringing online listings.
-Prohibition of the sale or distribution of counterfeit goods.
-On-site seizure of infringing goods (entire stock or representative samples) and inventory recording.
-Requests for commercial information, including the identification of suppliers and buyers, the quantity of units produced or sold, and their respective sale prices.
These measures are typically granted within 5 to 10 business days in Argentina.

To obtain such measures, the petitioner must demonstrate:
–Likelihood of success on the merits, demonstrated through valid and enforceable trademark registrations.
–Urgency and risk of irreparable harm (e.g., ongoing or imminent sales).
–Guarantee (bond), if required by the judge, to compensate any illegitimate harm to the defendant.
Bonds in these cases typically range from USD 1,000 to USD 10,000, refundable if the lawsuit succeeds.
It should be noted that, within 10 days after the preliminary injunction has been enforced, the main lawsuit to determine whether an infringement has actually occurred must be initiated. This lawsuit must be preceded by a mandatory mediation process.

In cases of trademark infringement, companies may consider various pre-judicial remedies before initiating legal proceedings. These include sending cease and desist letters, requesting takedowns on digital platforms, or initiating settlement discussions. While these strategies are often less expensive, they have significant limitations.
They do not compel the infringer to cease activities, withdraw products from the market, or disclose key commercial information. It is also difficult to recover damages and legal fees through these alternative channels.
Compared to these remedies, preliminary injunctions are more robust and enforceable med are therefore recommended in high-impact cases.