3rd Level Marketing and Media Group (Pty) Ltd v South African Broadcasting Corporation Ltd (47204/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 406 (15 June 2022)

3rd Level Marketing and Media Group (Pty) Ltd v South African Broadcasting Corporation Ltd (47204/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 406 (15 June 2022)

The court found that the applicant failed to challenge each trade mark registration it sought to have removed and did not present evidence to establish its interest in the relevant marks, goods, or services. The applicant did not contend that the court erred in requiring locus standi to be established in the founding papers, nor did it challenge the reliance on the applicable legal principles. The grounds of appeal did not disclose any evidence establishing the applicant's interest. Consequently, the court was not persuaded that reasonable prospects of success existed for the appeal.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 406
Parties
Applicant: 3rd Level Marketing and Media Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: South African Broadcasting Corporation Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 June 2022
Case Number
47204/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Baqwa
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Rectification, Locus Standi, Leave to Appeal, Costs Order
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Rectification Locus Standi Leave to Appeal Costs Order

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

3rd Level Marketing and Media Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

South African Broadcasting Corporation Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the order handed down on 2 March 2022.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant established locus standi as an interested person under the Trade Marks Act for rectification of the Trade Mark Register.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant presented sufficient evidence in its founding affidavit to challenge the relevant trade mark registrations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to challenge each trade mark registration it sought to have removed and did not present evidence to establish its interest in the relevant marks, goods, or services. The applicant did not contend that the court erred in requiring locus standi to be established in the founding papers, nor did it challenge the reliance on the applicable legal principles. The grounds of appeal did not disclose any evidence establishing the applicant's interest. Consequently, the court was not persuaded that reasonable prospects of success existed for the appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, such costs to include the costs consequent upon the employment of two counsel.