The Defendant has not undertaken to apply for registration in Uganda of the trademarks and the Plaintiff has challenged its locus standi to seek a remedy of removal of its trademark from the Ugandan trademark register. Is the Defendant an aggrieved party within the meaning of section 45 of the Trademarks Act? I will further on consider this issue. Section 44 of the Trademarks Act 2010 provides that the Registrar of Trademarks may refuse to register a trademark relating to goods or in respect of goods or description of goods if it is proved to his or her satisfaction by the person opposing the application for registration that the mark is identical with or nearly resemble the trademark which is already registered in respect of the same goods; the same description of goods; or services or a description of services. Secondly the Registrar may refuse to register any trademark relating to services in respect of any services or description of services on the same grounds. The Registrar of Trademarks is not a party to this suit. There is no pending application for registration of the trademarks since it is proven that the trademarks which have been described above have already been registered in Uganda. Section 44 of the Trademarks Act 2010 gives the Registrar discretionary powers whether to register a trademark in respect of the same goods, same description of goods or services or description of services associated with those goods or goods of same description even if it has already been registered in the place of origin of the goods with the trademark. Therefore the question is whether the exercise of discretionary powers by the Registrar can be challenged in this suit? Under section 36 of the Trademarks Act 2010, subject to certain exceptions found in sections 41 and 24, the registered owner of a trademark has a right of exclusive use of the trademark in relation to those goods for which it is registered. Section 24 of the Trademarks Act makes a saving in respect of the use of name, address or description of goods or services and provides the registration of a trademark shall not affect the bona fide use by a person of his or her own name or the name of his or her place of business or of the name of the place of business. Secondly the bona fide use by a person of any description of the character or quality of his or her goods and services. Thirdly it saves bona fide use of the description of the character or quality of his or her services. Section 41 on the other hand the saves vested rights. Decision of Hon. Mr. Justice Christopher Madrama Izama *^*~?+: 24