reputation and are known by some distinguishing feature/s. The right that is protected by a common law cause of action of passing off is the goodwill likely to be injured by the misrepresentation of the respondent‟s goods as that of the plaintiff. It is therefore essential to plead the reputation or good will acquired the basic facts of misrepresentation, the fact that goods were sold as that of the plaintiff or that the public are likely to be deceived into believing that the respondent‟s goods are that of the plaintiff and damages would ensure. In addition the applicant has to show that irreparable injury that cannot be atoned for by way of damages would occur. In this case the plaintiff/applicant pleaded the ingredients of passing off, namely the acquired reputation. As far as the distinguishing features of its mark are concerned, the plaintiff relied on the get up of products produced in court. However it must be proved in the application that there was deception or likely to be deception by sale of products. The applicant referred to a range of the applicant‟s products and compared similarity with the respondent‟s products. He did not compare them to the registered trade mark which is the right assigned to the applicant. The evidence shows that this right was assigned in the year 2009 and not 2001 or 2003. The applicant‟s case is based on registration and the assignment of a trademark under the Trademarks Act cap 217 (repealed). The evidence so far adduced shows that the trademark in issue is with respect to a combination of words. I refrain from establishing whether the words “Nice & Soft” are similar to the words “Nice & Lovely” or are likely to lead to confusion and hence passing off without the accompanying trade dress in evidence. Such a finding is on the main matter in controversy and on the merits and should be left for determination in the main suit. In the premises I am not satisfied that this is a proper case for the grant of a temporary injunction. The applicant‟s application falls short of the test for a prima facie or arguable case and is accordingly dismissed with costs. Ruling delivered at the Commercial Court in Kampala this 30th day of September 2011 Hon. Mr. Justice Christopher Madrama In the presence of Yesse Mugenyi for the applicant, Bamwite Edward for the Respondent, Parties not in court, Ojambo Makoha Court clerk Hon. Mr. Justice Christopher Madrama