Absolute vs Relative Grounds for Trademark Refusal Nepal

06 Aug, 2026
Guides
IP Sewa Admin
7 min read

Nepal's Department of Industry refuses a trademark on two kinds of grounds: absolute grounds, which are problems with the mark itself — it's descriptive, generic, deceptive or prohibited — and relative grounds, which are conflicts with an earlier mark. An examiner checks both. Understanding the difference tells you whether to fix your mark, narrow your goods, or search harder before you file.

Key Takeaways

Absolute grounds concern the mark itself — a descriptive, generic, deceptive or prohibited mark is refused regardless of anyone else's rights.
Relative grounds concern conflicts — your mark clashes with an earlier registered or applied-for mark for similar goods.
The Department of Industry examines both grounds under the Patent, Design and Trademark Act 1965.
Fix absolute problems by choosing a distinctive, lawful mark; avoid relative problems by searching before you file.
An objection is not a final refusal — you can respond, and many applications are saved with a good reply.
A distinctive mark plus a clean search is the best insurance against both grounds.

The two families of refusal: one is about your mark, the other about someone else's.

What are absolute grounds for refusal?

Absolute grounds are objections to the mark itself, independent of any other party's rights — the sign simply cannot function or is not allowed as a trademark. The Department of Industry raises them during examination under the Patent, Design and Trademark Act 1965. They fall into a few clear categories, and most are avoidable by choosing your brand carefully before you file. See what can be trademarked.

The four absolute grounds most often raised in examination — all avoidable at the naming stage.

Descriptive or generic marks

A mark that merely describes the product — "Fresh Milk" for milk — or is the generic name for it cannot be registered, because it doesn't distinguish one trader from another and no one should monopolise ordinary words. The fix is a distinctive brand: invented, arbitrary or suggestive names register far more easily than descriptive ones.

Deceptive marks

A mark that misleads consumers about the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods — for example implying a product is made somewhere it isn't — is refused as deceptive. Choose a name that is honest about what you actually sell.

Prohibited and protected signs

Marks contrary to public morality or order, and protected signs such as national flags, state emblems and official hallmarks, cannot be registered. Nepal's national emblem and flag, and similar protected symbols, are off-limits for private trademarks.

What are relative grounds for refusal?

Relative grounds are objections based on an earlier party's rights — your mark is refused because it conflicts with a trademark already registered or applied for. The core test is whether your mark is identical or confusingly similar to an earlier mark for the same or similar goods, such that consumers might be confused. Because Nepal is first-to-file, the earlier mark usually wins. See what counts as confusingly similar.

Identical and similar marks

An identical mark for identical goods is the clearest relative refusal. But similarity is enough: marks that look, sound or mean something close — and cover related goods — can be refused because the overlap risks confusion. Both the marks and the goods are compared together.

Conflict with a well-known mark

A mark that clashes with a genuinely well-known mark can be refused even across different goods, because well-known marks get wider protection under the Paris Convention (Article 6bis), which Nepal recognises. See well-known trademarks in Nepal.

Absolute vs relative grounds: side by side

	Absolute grounds	Relative grounds
About	The mark itself	Conflict with an earlier mark
Typical cause	Descriptive, generic, deceptive, prohibited	Identical or confusingly similar to an earlier right
Depends on others?	No	Yes — an earlier mark exists
How to avoid	Choose a distinctive, lawful mark	Search the register before filing
Can you fix it?	Sometimes — argue distinctiveness or amend	Sometimes — narrow goods, consent, or coexist

How do you avoid both grounds?

Most refusals are preventable with two habits, done before you file. First, pick a distinctive, lawful mark — avoid descriptive words, misleading claims and protected symbols — which clears the absolute grounds. Second, run a proper clearance search for identical and similar earlier marks in your class, which clears the relative grounds.

Choose an invented or arbitrary name over a descriptive one.
Check the name isn't deceptive about origin or quality.
Avoid flags, state emblems and protected signs.
Search the register — see how to search before filing.
Confirm the right class so you compare against the right marks — NICE classification.

What if you get an objection?

An examiner's objection is not the end — it is an office action you can answer, and a well-argued response saves many applications. For an absolute objection you might submit evidence that the mark has become distinctive through use, or amend the specification; for a relative objection you might narrow your goods, obtain the earlier owner's consent, or argue the marks aren't truly confusing. Read how to respond to a trademark objection, and if a mark reaches publication, remember others can still file an opposition.

Which grounds can you overcome, and which can't you?

Not every objection is equally fatal, so the ground you hit shapes your options. A descriptive mark can sometimes be saved by evidence that long, exclusive use has made customers treat it as your brand — but that is hard and slow to prove, so it is better to start distinctive. A deceptive or prohibited mark is effectively a dead end: you cannot argue your way to registering a flag or a misleading claim, so you must change the mark. On the relative side, a conflict is often more workable than it looks — you may narrow your goods to move away from the earlier mark, obtain the earlier owner's consent, or show the marks are not truly confusing. The practical lesson: absolute problems usually mean rethinking the name, while relative problems often mean adjusting the filing.

A quick example of each

Say you want to brand a tea business. "Nepal Tea" is a weak choice on absolute grounds — it is descriptive and geographic, naming the product and its origin rather than distinguishing your source. An invented name like "Himvanti" is far stronger. Now suppose "Himvanti" is distinctive but an earlier tea brand "Himwanti" is already registered in the same class — that is a relative conflict, because the marks sound alike for identical goods. The first problem needs a better name; the second needs a search you should have run before filing, and possibly a different name or class strategy.

People also search for

Clear both grounds before you file

Give your mark the best chance: run it through our Trademark Conflict Checker for relative conflicts and browse the register, then file with our team — we screen for absolute and relative grounds, word a defensible specification, and handle any objection. Talk to an IP expert before you file to avoid a refused, non-refundable application.

#trademark #refusal #examination

Frequently asked questions

Absolute grounds concern the mark itself — it is descriptive, generic, deceptive or prohibited — and apply regardless of anyone else's rights. Relative grounds concern a conflict with an earlier registered or applied-for mark for similar goods. Examiners in Nepal check both.

Absolute grounds include marks that are not distinctive, that merely describe the product, that are generic, that deceive consumers about origin or quality, or that are prohibited — such as national flags, state emblems and marks contrary to public morality.

Relative grounds arise when your mark is identical or confusingly similar to an earlier registered or applied-for mark covering the same or similar goods, so consumers might be confused. A clash with a well-known mark can also be a relative ground, even across different goods.

Generally no — a mark that merely describes the goods, like "Fresh Milk" for milk, lacks distinctiveness and is refused on absolute grounds. In some cases long, exclusive use that makes the mark distinctive of one source can support registration, but it is hard to prove.

Marks are confusingly similar when they look, sound or mean something close enough that consumers might mistake one for the other, and they cover the same or related goods or services. Both the marks and the goods are compared together in the assessment.

No. National flags, state emblems, official hallmarks and similar protected signs cannot be registered as private trademarks. Marks contrary to public order or morality are also refused on absolute grounds.

No. An objection, or office action, is the examiner raising a problem you can answer. Many applications are saved with a good response — arguing distinctiveness, amending the goods, obtaining consent, or showing the marks are not truly confusing.

Choose a distinctive, honest and lawful mark to clear absolute grounds, and run a clearance search for identical and similar earlier marks in your class to clear relative grounds. A distinctive name plus a clean search prevents most refusals.

The Department of Industry examines each application under the Patent, Design and Trademark Act 1965 and raises any absolute or relative objections. Third parties can also challenge a published mark on relative grounds by filing an opposition within 90 days.

Sometimes. If the goods or services are different enough, or the earlier owner consents, similar marks may coexist. Where confusion is likely and there is no consent, the later mark is usually refused on relative grounds because Nepal is first-to-file.

Comments (0)

Be the first to share your thoughts.

Absolute vs Relative Grounds for Trademark Refusal in Nepal

Key Takeaways