Fountainhead Property Trust v Centurion Surbubs Mall (Pty) Ltd (CT003Feb2015) [2015] ZACT 60 (14 July 2015)

Fountainhead Property Trust v Centurion Surbubs Mall (Pty) Ltd (CT003Feb2015) [2015] ZACT 60 (14 July 2015)

The Tribunal found that the applicant had established substantial reputation and goodwill in the CENTURION MALL name and trade mark since 1983. The respondent's company name 'CENTURION SUBURBS MALL' is confusingly similar to the applicant's name and trade mark, with the addition of 'SUBURBS' not sufficiently distinguishing it. The similarity is likely to mislead or confuse members of the public into believing an association between the respondent and the applicant. The respondent did not oppose the application, and the applicant demonstrated that the requirements for relief under sections 11(2)(b) and 11(2)(c) of the Companies Act were met. The Tribunal concluded that the respondent's...

Citation
[2015] ZACT 60
Parties
Applicant: Fountainhead Property Trust; Respondent: Centurion Suburbs Mall (Pty) Ltd
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 July 2015
Case Number
CT 003FEB2015
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Default Order Application Under Companies Act Section 160
Outcome
Application granted. The respondent's company name is found to be confusingly similar and in contravention of the Companies Act.
Legal Topics
Company Name Dispute, Confusingly Similar Names, Trade Mark Reputation, Section 11 Companies Act, Passing Off, Goodwill Protection
Commercial and Corporate Company Name Dispute Confusingly Similar Names Trade Mark Reputation Section 11 Companies Act Passing Off Goodwill Protection

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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fountainhead Property Trust

Applicant

Centurion Suburbs Mall (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Default Order Application Under Companies Act Section 160

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's company name 'CENTURION SUBURBS MALL' is confusingly similar to the applicant's registered trade mark and company name 'CENTURION MALL'.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's company name contravenes sections 11(2)(b) and 11(2)(c) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to relief under section 160 of the Companies Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant had established substantial reputation and goodwill in the CENTURION MALL name and trade mark since 1983. The respondent's company name 'CENTURION SUBURBS MALL' is confusingly similar to the applicant's name and trade mark, with the addition of 'SUBURBS' not sufficiently distinguishing it. The similarity is likely to mislead or confuse members of the public into believing an association between the respondent and the applicant. The respondent did not oppose the application, and the applicant demonstrated that the requirements for relief under sections 11(2)(b) and 11(2)(c) of the Companies Act were met. The Tribunal concluded that the respondent's...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The respondent's company name is found to be confusingly similar and in contravention of the Companies Act.

Orders

  • The respondent's name does not comply with section 11(2)(b) and section 11(2)(c) of the Companies Act.
  • The respondent is ordered to choose a new name and file a notice of amendment to its Memorandum of Incorporation.