South Africa Case Law

Supercart South Africa (Pty) Limited v Vanesco (Pty) Limited (46975/2018; 2021/30331)

Supercart South Africa (Pty) Limited v Vanesco (Pty) Limited (46975/2018; 2021/30331) [2025] ZAGPJHC 324; [2025] 2 All SA 911 (GJ) (25 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

46975/2018; 2021/30331

Judge

Goedhart

The High Court ordered further and better discovery in related design disputes, dismissed a strike-out application, granted condonation, and imposed a confidentiality regime.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Confidentiality Regime
• Registered Design Infringement
• Unlawful Competition
• Reasonable Royalty
• Interlocutory Strike Out

Red Diamond Holdings SARL v Eye of the Storm 2 (Pty) Ltd (13280/18)

Red Diamond Holdings SARL v Eye of the Storm 2 (Pty) Ltd (13280/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 490; [2020] 1 All SA 829 (GJ); 2020 BIP 392 (GJ) (28 November 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13280/18

Judge

Spilg

The court found trademark infringement for post-September 2017 Lee Cooper apparel, refused final interdictory relief, and ordered disclosure and accounting.

• Trade Marks Act
• Sub Licensing
• Reasonable Royalty
• Accounting For Profits
• Trademark Infringement
• Trademark-infringement

Bata Brands SARL and Others v Novita Shoes CC and Another (3649/2010)

Bata Brands SARL and Others v Novita Shoes CC and Another (3649/2010) [2019] ZAKZPHC 16; 2019 BIP 111 (KZP) (18 March 2019)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

3649/2010

Judge

Gorven

The court found that the respondents' shoe sole pattern was sufficiently similar to the applicants' registered trade marks to create a likelihood of confusion among a substantial number of consumers in the marketplace. The respondents' detailed analysis of differences did not outweigh the dominant general impression of similarity. The respondents' own evidence acknowledged intentional differentiation, which the court interpreted as an admission of use as a trade mark. The survey evidence supported the finding of confusion. The court held that the respondents' use was not merely decorative but…

Source excerpt

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Damages Enquiry
• Interdict
• Reasonable Royalty

Edcon Limited v Edgars Consolidated Stores Limited and Another (23718/2006)

Edcon Limited v Edgars Consolidated Stores Limited and Another (23718/2006) [2018] ZAGPPHC 695; 2019 BIP 105 (GP) (12 September 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

23718/2006

Judge

R G Tolmay

The court granted Edcon Limited joinder as second plaintiff in a trade mark infringement action, finding a direct interest and rejecting a substitution-based objection.

• Joinder Of Parties
• Trade Mark Infringement
• Assignment Of Intellectual Property
• Prescription
• Reasonable Royalty
• Joinder-of-parties

Randfontein Local Municipality and Another v Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd (36264/2013; 36265/2013)

Randfontein Local Municipality and Another v Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd (36264/2013; 36265/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 638 (15 September 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

36264/2013; 36265/2013

Judge

S. Potterill

The High Court dismissed a leave-to-appeal application, finding no reasonable prospects of success and ordering the applicants to pay costs.

• Leave To Appeal
• Oral Agreement
• Reasonable Royalty
• Recusal Application
• Leave-to-appeal
• Oral-agreement

Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd v Randfontein Local Municipality and Another (36264/2013, 36265/2013)

Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd v Randfontein Local Municipality and Another (36264/2013, 36265/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 557 (31 July 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

36264/2013, 36265/2013

Judge

Potterill

The High Court held that Quill owned BIQ copyright and that the municipalities infringed it by continuing to use, copy and adapt the software after licence termination.

• Copyright Infringement
• Software Licensing
• Reasonable Royalty
• Interdictory Relief
• Oral Agreement
• Statutory Damages

Board of Healthcare Funders v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Others (35769/2010)

Board of Healthcare Funders v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Others (35769/2010) [2012] ZAGPPHC 65 (15 May 2012)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

35769/2010

Judge

Kollapen

The court found that the applicant is the author and owner of copyright in the PCNS, having demonstrated originality through the skill, effort, and resources invested in its development over several decades. The PCNS is a compilation eligible for copyright protection, and assignment agreements further support the applicant's ownership. The respondents' continued use and reproduction of substantial parts of the PCNS after resigning as members constituted infringement. The court rejected the defences of State copyright, implied perpetual licence, and continued licence, finding no basis in law o…

Source excerpt

• Copyright Infringement
• Compilation Originality
• Implied Licence
• State Copyright
• Reasonable Royalty

Resca and Another v Dave Sheer Gunsmithing CC (98/6778)

Resca and Another v Dave Sheer Gunsmithing CC (98/6778) [2011] ZACCP 2; 2011 BIP 6 (CP) (26 July 2011)

Court

Court of the Commissioner of Patents

Case number

98/6778

Judge

Hiemstra

The court granted relief for patent infringement, including an interdict, delivery up for destruction, and an enquiry into damages or reasonable royalty.

• Patent Infringement
• Interdict
• Damages Enquiry
• Delivery Up
• Reasonable Royalty
• Patent-infringement

Puma AG Rudolf Dassler Sport v Global Warming (Pty) Ltd (408/08)

Puma AG Rudolf Dassler Sport v Global Warming (Pty) Ltd (408/08) [2009] ZASCA 89; 2010 (2) SA 600 (SCA); [2010] 1 All SA 25 (SCA); 2009 BIP 192 (SCA) (11 September 2009)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

408/08

Judges

Harms, Heher, Van Heerden, Maya, Wallis

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed Puma’s appeal in a trade mark dispute, finding Global Warming’s shoe stripe and DT NEW YORK branding were not confusingly similar.

• Trade Mark Infringement
• Likelihood Of Confusion
• Reasonable Royalty
• Objective Comparison
• Source Identifier
• Trade-mark-infringement

Feldman NO v EMI Music SA (Pty) Ltd/ EMI Music Publishing SA (Pty) Ltd (268/2008)

Feldman NO v EMI Music SA (Pty) Ltd/ EMI Music Publishing SA (Pty) Ltd (268/2008) [2009] ZASCA 75; 2010 (1) SA 1 (SCA); [2009] 4 All SA 307 (SCA); 2009 BIP 294 (SCA) (1 June 2009)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

268/2008

Judges

Farlam, Brand, Maya, Mhlantla, Hurt

A co-author of joint-authorship copyright works cannot claim all infringement damages without pleading entitlement to the full share or joining the other co-authors.

• Copyright Infringement
• Joint Authorship
• Exceptions To Pleadings
• Reasonable Royalty
• Punitive Damages
• Copyright-infringement