South Africa Case Law

Shell South Africa Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Exclusive Access Trading 431 (Pty) Ltd (5434/2014)

Shell South Africa Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Exclusive Access Trading 431 (Pty) Ltd (5434/2014) [2014] ZAGPJHC 346 (28 October 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

5434/2014

Judge

Andrews

The High Court granted an interdict, return of assets, and eviction after finding the franchise agreement had been lawfully cancelled and the respondent was unlawfully trading under Shell branding.

• Franchise Agreement Termination
• Intellectual Property Protection
• Eviction
• Interdict
• Breach Of Contract
• Possessory Rights

Bruwer and Another v Pholosa Asset Management (Pty) Ltd and Another (A5002/08, A5003/08)

Bruwer and Another v Pholosa Asset Management (Pty) Ltd and Another (A5002/08, A5003/08) [2008] ZAGPHC 356 (18 November 2008)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

A5002/08, A5003/08

Judges

FHD van Oosten, M Jajbhay, CD de Jager

The court found that the respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving the requirements for a final interdict. There was no direct or conclusive evidence that the appellants used or intended to use the respondents' confidential information or intellectual property. The fears and possibilities raised by the respondents amounted to speculation and did not constitute a reasonable apprehension of harm. The appellants were not bound by any restraint of trade, and the law permits them to use their skills and experience for their own benefit in competition with their former employers. The seco…

Source excerpt

• Final Interdict
• Confidential Information
• Intellectual Property Protection
• Restraint Of Trade
• Debt Collection Industry
• Reasonable Apprehension Of Harm

Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Limited v Gründlingh and Others (CCT31/05)

Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Limited v Gründlingh and Others (CCT31/05) [2006] ZACC 6; 2006 (8) BCLR 883 (CC); 2007 (6) SA 350 (CC) (18 May 2006)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT31/05

Judges

Langa, Moseneke, Mokgoro, O'Regan, Sachs, Skweyiya, Van der Westhuizen, Yacoob

The Constitutional Court upheld the SCA on unlawful competition, found no arbitrary deprivation of property, and refused direct access to challenge gambling legislation.

• Unlawful Competition
• Intellectual Property Protection
• Arbitrary Deprivation Of Property
• Development Of Common Law
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Gambling Regulation