Ritz Hotel Ltd v Charles of Ritz Ltd. and Another (17/1988) [1988] ZASCA 17; [1988] 2 All SA 292 (A) (21 March 1988)

Ritz Hotel Ltd v Charles of Ritz Ltd. and Another (17/1988) [1988] ZASCA 17; [1988] 2 All SA 292 (A) (21 March 1988)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant was a 'person aggrieved' in respect of the Class 3 marks, as the respondent's registrations were cited in opposition to its own applications, thereby affecting its legal rights. However, for the Class 25 and 26 marks, the appellant failed to demonstrate a genuine intention to trade in the relevant goods, and its activities did not amount to trading in those classes. The Court found that African Sales, as a registered user, had made bona fide use of the Class 3 marks in South Africa, and that quality control exercised by the US company on behalf of the respondent satisfied the requirements of 'permitted use' under the Act. The Court...

Citation
[1988] ZASCA 17
Parties
Appellant: The Ritz Hotel Limited; Respondent: Charles of the Ritz Limited; Respondent: Registrar of Trade Marks
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 March 1988
Case Number
17/1988
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed with costs; application to expunge trade marks dismissed.
Judges
Nicholas, Corbett, Hoexter, Smalberger, Nestadt
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Rectification, Bona Fide Use, Registered User Control, Likelihood of Confusion, Locus Standi
Intellectual Property Trade Mark Rectification Bona Fide Use Registered User Control Likelihood of Confusion Locus Standi

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Ritz Hotel Limited

Appellant

Charles of the Ritz Limited

Respondent

Registrar of Trade Marks

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is a 'person aggrieved' entitled to seek rectification of the trade marks register.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's trade marks in Classes 3, 25, and 26 should be expunged for non-use or likelihood of confusion.
  3. 3 Whether use by a registered user under the control of a third party constitutes 'permitted use' under the Trade Marks Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant was a 'person aggrieved' in respect of the Class 3 marks, as the respondent's registrations were cited in opposition to its own applications, thereby affecting its legal rights. However, for the Class 25 and 26 marks, the appellant failed to demonstrate a genuine intention to trade in the relevant goods, and its activities did not amount to trading in those classes. The Court found that African Sales, as a registered user, had made bona fide use of the Class 3 marks in South Africa, and that quality control exercised by the US company on behalf of the respondent satisfied the requirements of 'permitted use' under the Act. The Court...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed with costs; application to expunge trade marks dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • The cross-appeal is allowed, including the costs of two counsel.