South Africa Case Law

Swimming South Africa v South African Water Polo NPC and Others (2025/040663)

Swimming South Africa v South African Water Polo NPC and Others (2025/040663) [2025] ZAWCHC 249 (18 June 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2025/040663

Judge

J Cloete

The High Court dismissed Swimming South Africa’s urgent bid to stop South African Water Polo NPC from forming and organising water polo, finding no clear right or unlawful interference.

• Interdictory Relief
• Governance Of Sporting Bodies
• National Federation Recognition
• Freedom Of Association
• Passing Off
• Statutory Rights Under Nsra

Van Willing Funerals CC and Another v Vision Direct 155 (Pty) Ltd t/a Transafrica (4132/2023)

Van Willing Funerals CC and Another v Vision Direct 155 (Pty) Ltd t/a Transafrica (4132/2023) [2025] ZAECQBHC 21 (17 June 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

4132/2023

Judge

J W Eksteen

The High Court dismissed a passing-off interdict application, finding the funeral policy use of “Van Willing Funerals” had been authorised by agreement.

• Passing Off
• Unlawful Competition
• Trade Name Infringement
• Final Interdict
• Fais Act Compliance
• Passing-off

Kodisang and Others v THK Gallery and Others (2025/066625)

Kodisang and Others v THK Gallery and Others (2025/066625) [2025] ZAWCHC 214 (21 May 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2025/066625

Judge

Da Silva Salie

The High Court granted an urgent interim interdict over an art exhibition titled “Your Beauty Is Our Concern,” finding passing off and misappropriation of the applicants’ earlier work.

• Passing Off
• Interim Interdict
• Artistic Goodwill
• Plagiarism
• Misappropriation Of Creative Work
• Passing-off

Adcock Ingram Limited and Others v Cipla Medpro (Pty) Limited (10455/2023)

Adcock Ingram Limited and Others v Cipla Medpro (Pty) Limited (10455/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 170 (17 April 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

10455/2023

Judge

Lekhuleni

The court found that the applicants' URIZONE trade mark and the respondent's FURIZOME trade mark are both invented words used for identical pharmaceutical products treating urinary tract infections. The dominant elements of both marks are strikingly similar in visual, aural, and conceptual respects, with only minor differences in their prefixes and suffixes. The court held that these differences are insignificant and that the overall impression created by the marks is such that a substantial number of consumers, including patients, doctors, and pharmacists, are likely to be deceived or confus…

Source excerpt

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Unlawful Competition
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Pharmaceutical Regulation
• Generic Substitution

Woodlands Dairy Proprietary Limited v Sansom Farming CC and Others (2022/056524)

Woodlands Dairy Proprietary Limited v Sansom Farming CC and Others (2022/056524) [2025] ZAGPPHC 298 (10 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2022/056524

Judge

Dippenaar

Court dismissed a trade mark and passing-off application over FIRST CHOICE and FRESH CHOICE dairy marks, finding the composite marks not confusingly similar.

• Trade Marks Act
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Disclaimer Of Rights
• Anti Dilution
• Passing Off
• Distinctiveness

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v Colgate Palmolive (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/095598)

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v Colgate Palmolive (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/095598) [2025] ZAGPJHC 654 (28 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/095598

Judges

Adams, Dippenaar, Botsi-Thulare

Appeal dismissed against an enforcement order under section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act, after the court found exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm.

• Enforcement Of Judgments
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm
• Advertising Regulation
• Passing Off
• Balance Of Convenience

Jonsson Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Aktiebolaget, P.J Jonnson Och Soner (52169/2021)

Jonsson Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Aktiebolaget, P.J Jonnson Och Soner (52169/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1091 (23 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

52169/2021

Judge

Holland-Muter

The High Court dismissed an opposition to JONNSON registration in class 7, holding that heavy mining machinery is too dissimilar from protective clothing and footwear to cause confusion.

• Trade Mark Opposition
• Similarity Of Goods
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Distinctive Character
• Unfair Advantage
• Passing Off

Designer Water (Pty) Ltd v Alkamax Beverages (Pty) Ltd and Others (59246/21)

Designer Water (Pty) Ltd v Alkamax Beverages (Pty) Ltd and Others (59246/21) [2024] ZAGPPHC 878 (9 September 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

59246/21

Judge

M V Noko

The High Court dismissed Designer Water’s leave to appeal against refusal of an interim interdict over trademark, passing off, and confidentiality claims.

• Interim Interdict
• Trademark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Confidential Information
• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Award

Solo Foods Sales and Distrubutions (Pty) Limited v Kalinda Trading CC and Others (37574/2021)

Solo Foods Sales and Distrubutions (Pty) Limited v Kalinda Trading CC and Others (37574/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 752 (12 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

37574/2021

Judge

Gotz AJ

The High Court granted Solo Foods an interdict over the VITA NUTS mark and dismissed Kalinda Trading’s counterapplication to cancel VITA NUT.

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Trade Mark Registration
• Counterfeit Goods Act
• Passing Off
• Interdict
• Reputation And Goodwill

African National Congress v Umkhonto Wesizwe Party and Another (D153/2024)

African National Congress v Umkhonto Wesizwe Party and Another (D153/2024) [2024] ZAKZDHC 50 (8 August 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D153/2024

Judge

Chetty

The court found that, having considered the arguments and the principles applicable to leave to appeal, another court could reasonably differ on the findings regarding jurisdiction, locus standi, and the merits of the trade mark infringement dispute. The matter raises significant public interest and novel legal issues with national implications for the parties and their members. Accordingly, the court was satisfied that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success and that there were compelling reasons for granting leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Source excerpt

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Jurisdiction
• Urgent Interdict
• Locus Standi
• Superior Courts Act