Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Eva-Last Distributors (Pty) Ltd v Timmdek (Pty) Ltd and Another (1729 /2022) [2024] ZAWCHC 126 (8 May 2024)
The High Court allowed an amendment to registered design certificates to record a release date, holding the change did not alter the designs or their validity.
Jack Maserow Manufacturers CC v AXZS Industries (Pty) Ltd t/a Don Elly Enterprises (2014/60485) [2015] ZAGPPHC 647; 2015 BIP 450 (GP) (8 September 2015)
The High Court found that the respondent's Seville bedroom suite infringed the applicant's registered design and granted interdictory and damages-related relief.
Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v 3MFuture Africa (Pty) Ltd (47/2013) [2013] ZASCA 157; 2013 BIP 128 (SCA) (22 November 2013)
The court held that the claimed invention was not confined to authorising only single transactions but extended to authorising multiple transactions at the selection of the account holder. The language of the claim did not support the respondent's construction that the method was limited to single transactions. The prior art (McAllister patent) disclosed a method that allowed an account holder to enable or disable an account for transactions, which anticipated the essential elements of the claimed invention. As a result, claims 17, 18, and 19 were not novel and were invalid. The patent was th…
Source excerpt
Alcatraz Intergrated Intelligent Systems (Pty) Ltd v Intergra-Set (Pty) Ltd (4260/2005) [2010] ZACCP 8; 2010 BIP 94 (CP) (8 October 2010)
The court held that a patent revocation application was barred by res judicata because the validity dispute had already been finally decided between the same parties.
Sunsmart Products (Pty) Ltd v Flag and Flagpole Industries (Pty) Ltd t/a National Flag (7385/04) [2005] ZAGPHC 6; [2006] 3 All SA 206 (T) (7 November 2005)
The court dismissed the patent 97/10535 and design infringement actions, holding the patent was not infringed and the design lacked novelty. A settled patent 99/3281 claim was made an order.
Sunsmart Products (Pty) Ltd v Flag and Flagpole Industries (Pty) Ltd t/a National Flag (97/10535, 99/3281, 7385/2004) [2005] ZACCP 2; 2005 BIP 31 (CP) (7 November 2005)
The court held that the defendant did not infringe patent 97/10535, but the raised design claim failed for lack of novelty. The agreed order in patent 99/3281 was granted.
Weltevrede Nursery (Pty) Ltd v Keith Kirsten’s (Pty) Ltd and Another (515/2002) [2003] ZASCA 136; [2004] 1 All SA 181 (SCA); 2004 (4) SA 110 (SCA); 2003 BIP 328 (SCA) (28 November 2003)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that Keith Kirsten’s (Pty) Ltd was not entitled to the plant breeder’s right for Canna Phasion because it was neither the breeder nor the discoverer of the variety. The application contained material misrepresentations regarding the origin and novelty of the plant, and the registration process failed to comply with statutory requirements, including the absence of a proper description and incorrect issuance of the certificate. The evidence established that the variety was known in the horticultural community before the application date, defeating the novelty r…
Source excerpt
Robinson v D.Cooper Corporation of South Africa (Pty)Ltd. (58/84) [1984] ZASCA 58; [1984] 2 All SA 393 (A) ; 1984 (3) SA 699 (A) (25 May 1984)
The appeal concerned whether a registered metal trap door frame design was protected under the Designs Act or excluded as functional construction.
Explore more
