South Africa Case Law

Cochrane Steel Products v Jumalu Fencing (166/2021)

Cochrane Steel Products v Jumalu Fencing (166/2021) [2022] ZASCA 100; 2022 BIP 483 (SCA) (22 June 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

166/2021

Judges

Maya, Makgoka, Gorven, Meyer, Matojane

The court held that the words 'clear view' are ordinary, non-distinctive, and commonly used descriptively in the fencing industry. The appellant's trade mark registration was subject to a disclaimer that does not bar others from bona fide descriptive use of 'clear view'. The respondent's use of 'clear view' was found to be descriptive of its fencing products and their characteristics, not likely to mislead or deceive as to origin. The evidence did not support the appellant's contention that the respondent's use was not bona fide. The passing-off claim failed because the appellant did not esta…

Source excerpt

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Disclaimer Of Non Distinctive Elements
• Passing Off
• Bona Fide Descriptive Use
• Unlawful Competition

Cochrane Steel Products (Pty) Ltd v G Harrop-Allin and Sons (Pty) Ltd (6031/21;12358/21)

Cochrane Steel Products (Pty) Ltd v G Harrop-Allin and Sons (Pty) Ltd (6031/21;12358/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 408 (9 June 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

6031/21;12358/21

Judge

Kooverjie

The court found that Harrop's use of 'RAZOR MESH' was not bona fide descriptive use but rather trademark use, given the prominence and context in which the mark appeared on Harrop's promotional materials. The mark 'RAZOR MESH' was held to be distinctive and not a generic or purely descriptive term in the fencing industry. The applicant's trademark was capable of distinguishing its goods from those of others, both at the time of registration and at the time of the application. Harrop failed to demonstrate that the mark had become customary or lost its distinctiveness. Consequently, Harrop's us…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Infringement
• Bona Fide Descriptive Use
• Distinctiveness
• Expungement Of Trademark
• Likelihood Of Confusion

Century City Property Owners Association (A Section 21 Company) v Century City Apartments Property Services CC and Others (17225/2005)

Century City Property Owners Association (A Section 21 Company) v Century City Apartments Property Services CC and Others (17225/2005) [2008] ZAWCHC 63; 2008 BIP 267 (C) (26 November 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

17225/2007

Judge

D M Davis

The court held that Century City was a protectable trade mark, rejected rectification, and restrained the respondent’s use in its name, domain, and website.

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Rectification Of Register
• Geographical Indication
• Close Corporation Name
• Bona Fide Descriptive Use