South Africa Case Law

Mercury Fittings (Pty) Ltd and Another v Doormax (Pty) Ltd and Another (4370/2023)

Mercury Fittings (Pty) Ltd and Another v Doormax (Pty) Ltd and Another (4370/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 183 (21 June 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

4370/2023

Judge

Mahomed

The High Court granted a final interdict stopping Doormax from dealing in “QS” products without consent, holding that the brand and goodwill were protectable and ongoing interference was unlawful.

• Common Law Trade Mark
• Unlawful Competition
• Goodwill Protection
• Interdictory Relief
• Common-law-trade-mark
• Unlawful-competition

Nativa (Pty) Limited v Austell Laboratories (Pty) Limited (1289/2018)

Nativa (Pty) Limited v Austell Laboratories (Pty) Limited (1289/2018) [2020] ZASCA 11; 2020 (5) SA 452 (SCA); 2020 BIP 562 (SCA) (19 March 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1289/2018

Judges

Navsa, Molemela, Schippers, Mojapelo, Eksteen

The SCA upheld an interim interdict against false disparagement in a television advertisement, finding the respondent’s claims about glucosamine and chondroitin were untrue.

• Unlawful Competition
• Injurious Falsehood
• Interim Interdict
• False Advertising
• Goodwill Protection
• Unlawful-competition

Pepkor Speciality (Proprietary) Limited and Another v Van Huyssteen and Others (16806/2018)

Pepkor Speciality (Proprietary) Limited and Another v Van Huyssteen and Others (16806/2018) [2018] ZAWCHC 157 (7 November 2018)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16806/2018

Judge

Baartman

The court found that the restraint of trade agreements entered into by the respondents with Tekkie Town survived the transfer of business to the applicants under section 197 of the Labour Relations Act, as the goodwill of Tekkie Town formed part of the transfer. The respondents, having admitted to operating a similar business and employing ex-Tekkie Town staff, were found to be in breach of the restraint agreements. While the original restraint was unreasonably wide, the court held that it could be modified to protect the applicants' legitimate interests without unduly restricting the respond…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Transfer Of Business
• Goodwill Protection
• Interim Interdict
• Employment Contracts

Fountainhead Property Trust v Centurion Surbubs Mall (Pty) Ltd (CT003Feb2015)

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

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CT 003FEB2015

The Companies Tribunal found Centurion Suburbs Mall (Pty) Ltd’s name confusingly similar to Fountainhead Property Trust’s CENTURION MALL mark and ordered a name change.

• Company Name Dispute
• Confusingly Similar Names
• Trade Mark Reputation
• Section 11 Companies Act
• Passing Off
• Goodwill Protection

Fairhaven Country Estate (Pty) Ltd v Harris and Another (735/2015)

Fairhaven Country Estate (Pty) Ltd v Harris and Another (735/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 100; 2015 (5) SA 540 (WCC); [2015] 3 All SA 618 (WCC); 2015 BIP 506 (WCC) (8 July 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

735/2015

Judge

Henney

The High Court granted an interdict over disputed Fairhaven domain names, finding the domains had become linked to the applicant’s goodwill and that threatened use by the respondent would amount to passing off.

• Domain Name Disputes
• Passing Off
• Unlawful Competition
• Trade Mark Protection
• Internet Law
• Goodwill Protection

Itec Distribution (Pty) Ltd v Tuscan Mood 179 (Pty) Ltd and Others (27575/13)

Itec Distribution (Pty) Ltd v Tuscan Mood 179 (Pty) Ltd and Others (27575/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 312 (29 October 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

27575/13

Judge

Nkosi

The High Court enforced a dealership agreement’s access and restraint clauses, allowing the applicant to inspect assets and restraining the first two respondents from competing.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Specific Performance
• Dealership Agreement
• Unlawful Competition
• Goodwill Protection
• Restraint-of-trade

Tuscan Mood 179 (Pty) Ltd v ITEC Distribution (Pty) Ltd and Others (15767/13)

Tuscan Mood 179 (Pty) Ltd v ITEC Distribution (Pty) Ltd and Others (15767/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 92 (2 April 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

15767/13

Judge

A B Rossouw

The High Court dismissed an urgent interdict application over customer and employee interference, finding the applicant lacked a clear right to relief.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Unlawful Competition
• Confidential Information
• Final Interdict
• Cession Of Rights
• Goodwill Protection

RICAMA CC v Twynham (3066/2010)

RICAMA CC v Twynham (3066/2010) [2011] ZAECGHC 26 (24 June 2011)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

3066/2010

Judge

Sangoni

The court found that the respondent's operation of a Sushi restaurant within the protected area and period constituted a breach of the restraint of trade clause, as the clause expressly prohibited competition in any form of restaurant or coffee shop business. The changes made by the applicant to the purchased business did not alter its essential nature as a restaurant, and the goodwill remained protectable. The respondent failed to prove that the applicant waived its rights under the restraint clause, as the evidence did not support a genuine dispute of fact or establish consent. The restrain…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Goodwill Protection
• Contract Enforcement

Xavier Hair Lab CC v Versace-Peters and Another (10/26773)

Xavier Hair Lab CC v Versace-Peters and Another (10/26773) [2010] ZAGPJHC 115 (19 November 2010)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

10/26773

Judge

Saldulker

High Court enforced a restraint of trade against former salon owners who opened a competing hair salon within 2km of the sold business.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Sale Of Business
• Goodwill Protection
• Interim Interdict
• Enforceability Of Contracts
• Restraint-of-trade

Jonker and Anders v Van der Watt and Anders (1758/2010)

Jonker and Anders v Van der Watt and Anders (1758/2010) [2010] ZAFSHC 111 (12 August 2010)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1758/2010

Judge

Kruger, R

The court found that the applicants, particularly the first applicant, have locus standi to enforce the restraint of trade agreement. The agreement was entered into with full knowledge of the parties' interests and the separation of business, with the first applicant paying R2 million for the goodwill and rights in the specified area. The restraint is mutual, reasonable in scope and duration, and designed to protect the applicants' proprietary interests, including client relationships and confidential pricing information. The respondents did not deny breaching the restraint and failed to disc…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Locus Standi
• Goodwill Protection
• Contract Enforcement