Yair Shimansky and Another v Browns the Diamond Store Proprietary Limited (9/2014)
Yair Shimansky and Another v Browns the Diamond Store Proprietary Limited (9/2014) [2014] ZASCA 214; 2014 BIP 341 (SCA) (1 December 2014)
The court held that the marks EVOLYM and EVOLVE, when considered globally, do not resemble each other in such a way as to cause deception or confusion. The visual similarity of the first four letters is insufficient, as the remainder of the marks differ significantly. Aural similarity is not established, and conceptual similarity is absent. The average purchaser of engagement or wedding rings is careful and unlikely to be confused, given the considered nature of such purchases and the distinct meanings of the marks. The court found no infringement under section 34(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act…
Source excerpt
- Trade Mark Infringement
- Likelihood Of Confusion
- Visual And Aural Similarity
- Dominant Feature Analysis
- Invented Word Protection