Royal Beech-Nut (Pty) Ltd. t/a Manhattan Confectioners v United Tobacco Company Ltd. t/a Willards Foods (584/90) [1992] ZASCA 113; 1992 (4) SA 118 (AD); [1992] 2 All SA 337 (A) (3 June 1992)

Royal Beech-Nut (Pty) Ltd. t/a Manhattan Confectioners v United Tobacco Company Ltd. t/a Willards Foods (584/90) [1992] ZASCA 113; 1992 (4) SA 118 (AD); [1992] 2 All SA 337 (A) (3 June 1992)

The court found that although the appellant's MANHATTAN mark had acquired a reputation and was distinctive of its confectionery products, the respondent's use of the MANHATTANS mark on potato chips was not likely to cause deception or confusion among ordinary members of the purchasing public. The parties operated in different fields—confectionery versus salty snacks—and the packaging, get-up, and overall presentation of the products were sufficiently distinct. There was no evidence of actual confusion, and the likelihood of the public believing that the respondent's potato chips were connected to the appellant's business was not established. The court held that the appellant failed to...

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 113
Parties
Appellant: Royal Beech-Nut (Proprietary) Limited t/a Manhattan Confectioners; Respondent: United Tobacco Company Limited t/a Willards Foods
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 June 1992
Case Number
584/90
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, Nestadt, Goldstone, Nicholas
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Trade Mark Distinctiveness, Unregistered Trade Mark, Likelihood of Confusion
Commercial and Corporate Intellectual Property Passing Off Trade Mark Distinctiveness Unregistered Trade Mark Likelihood of Confusion

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal Beech-Nut (Proprietary) Limited t/a Manhattan Confectioners

Appellant

United Tobacco Company Limited t/a Willards Foods

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's use of the trade mark MANHATTANS on its potato chips is likely to cause deception or confusion with the appellant's MANHATTAN confectionery mark.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's use of the MANHATTANS mark is calculated to cause consequential damage to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the appellant's MANHATTAN mark had acquired a reputation and was distinctive of its confectionery products, the respondent's use of the MANHATTANS mark on potato chips was not likely to cause deception or confusion among ordinary members of the purchasing public. The parties operated in different fields—confectionery versus salty snacks—and the packaging, get-up, and overall presentation of the products were sufficiently distinct. There was no evidence of actual confusion, and the likelihood of the public believing that the respondent's potato chips were connected to the appellant's business was not established. The court held that the appellant failed to...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

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