Unjani Clinic NPC v Yeko and Others (2023/132730) [2025] ZAGPJHC 146 (17 February 2025)

Unjani Clinic NPC v Yeko and Others (2023/132730) [2025] ZAGPJHC 146 (17 February 2025)

The court found that the applicant had established a clear case for trade mark relief. The first to fourth respondents withdrew their opposition and tendered costs, while the fifth and sixth respondents failed to participate or appear despite proper service. The applicant complied with all procedural requirements,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 146
Parties
Applicant: Unjani Clinic NPC; Respondent: Cynthia Gcinile Yeko; Respondent: P AND C Wellness Services CC; Respondent: Sizakele Goodness Nkosi; Respondent: Sizenkosi Care Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Lungile Zwane; Respondent: Zubuyile07 (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
2023/132730
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Opposed Motion; Hearing and Order
Outcome
Application granted; trade mark relief awarded to applicant.
Judges
Wright
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Opposed Motion, Withdrawal of Opposition
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Infringement Opposed Motion Withdrawal of Opposition

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unjani Clinic NPC

Applicant

Cynthia Gcinile Yeko

Respondent

P AND C Wellness Services CC

Respondent

Sizakele Goodness Nkosi

Respondent

Sizenkosi Care Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Lungile Zwane

Respondent

Zubuyile07 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Opposed Motion; Hearing and Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to trade mark relief against the respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the withdrawal of opposition by the first to fourth respondents and non-participation by the fifth and sixth respondents entitles the applicant to the relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a clear case for trade mark relief. The first to fourth respondents withdrew their opposition and tendered costs, while the fifth and sixth respondents failed to participate or appear despite proper service. The applicant complied with all procedural requirements, including filing heads of argument and serving notices. In the absence of any substantive opposition and given the merits of the application, the court held that the applicant was entitled to the relief sought. The draft order prepared by the applicant's attorneys was granted.

Court Disposition

Application granted; trade mark relief awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted the trade mark relief as set out in the draft order.
  • The first to fourth respondents are to pay the applicant's party and party costs.